0 Comments · Wednesday, November 6, 2013
The student paper’s
volunteer adviser, Emily Grannis, who also is a Reporter’s Committee for
Freedom of the Press fellow, talked with student editor John Vodrey on
the phone while he was in the station. That helped Vodrey cite
appropriate state statute and legal language to ask for an incident
0 Comments · Wednesday, October 30, 2013
I still object to shield laws. They are a de facto
form of licensing reporters. You are your sources are unprotected if
you’re not included in the definition of “journalist” or your work isn’t
1 Comment · Wednesday, October 16, 2013
I’ll be the odd man out for now. If I
have to write about Manning, I’ll probably refer to him as Bradley and
explain why he now calls himself Chelsea.
Annual media watchdog list critiques coverage of whistleblowers and wealth gaps — and the notion of journalistic objectivity
0 Comments · Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Unable to tell the story of a trend and
unable to talk about rising inequality for fear of appearing partisan,
reporters often fail to connect the dots for their readers.
0 Comments · Thursday, September 19, 2013
For a news junkie, the Internet helps me understand the
Middle East where someone always seems ready to make life miserable for
Media musings from Cincinnati and beyond
0 Comments · Wednesday, September 11, 2013
• Accurate reporting requires context. Why is gassing
hundreds of Syrian civilians in Damascus worse than shooting and killing
as many or more civilians about in and around Cairo? Why is the killing
and wounding of thousands in Cairo worse than endlessly raping,
wounding, mutilating and killing millions of civilians in the horribly
misnamed Democratic Republic of Congo?
by Zohair Hussain
92 days ago
As readers' interests shift, integrity seems to lose its main market in reporting
week’s “scandal” at the MTV Video Music Awards, the pacing of news and
reporting made itself known as a speed force to be reckoned with. In the minute-by-minute duration and aftermath of the performance of one, Miley Cyrus, and
her “partner in crime”, Robin Thicke, new age media came together to do what it
does best: twitter our feed with dribble and spit-up commentary.
It can’t be
denied that news reporting, in many ways, is stepping further away from hard
facts and closer to tabloid gossip. In a day and age where Twitter is the new paperboy,
it can’t be denied that the facts are coming faster. And while this could be an opportunity for better news, more quickly, more often than not we’re
trading chances for quick links to real stories with 140 character quips on
MC-Hammer-like “did you see her butt”s (#chauvanistsforCyrus).
disappointment comes, though, when we look to major media outlets (Still
trusted by some. Take off the aluminum hat, Johnny.) the next day for
hard-hitting news, only to see that they’ve decided to throw their own hats in
the ring. With prize-winning headlines such as CNN’s “Miley Cyrus twerks,
stuns VMAs crowd,” the morning news was just as obsessed as the evening
reporter, a writer, an observer, this obsessive, sprawling focus is what scares
me most. It isn’t the performance itself, full of dancers dressed as teddy bears or Cyrus’ gyrating hips on Thicke’s overly hyped crotch (See “Blurred
Lines” for more details). It isn’t so much the event that took place, as it was
the reactive reports that left an extra, bitter after taste to my morning
reporting, perceived to have more lenient, pop-culture laced subject
matter, used to hold itself to similar standards of respectful re-tellings of
facts rather than fiction. Though there had once been a clear distinction
between opinion pieces and news articles, even in the realm of aesthetic focus,
the lines are suddenly more blurred than ever. And where does that leave us,
the “responsible” voices?
in many ways, defined by the voices that carry out its most essential
conversations. If we are of the few so lucky as to have a readership, our words
carry the weight of decades of said cultural insight and historical backing.
What do we have to say for ourselves when these words, our influence, sacrifice
authenticity for celebrity? Integrity for popularity? What are we really
accomplishing when we re-draw the line between honest reporting and
scandalized, gossip mongering, and honest words inch closer to the latter? What
would our (fore)mothers say?
to say that there aren’t some voices, some news outlets out there, who aren’t
doing it right. While most couldn’t look away from Cyrus’ extended tongue
(search “Venom” and “Marvel Comics” for more details), The Guardian, for
example, wouldn’t look past the more subtly digressive implications of the
performance. Did you miss the moment where the young, stage-dominant, Caucasian
Miley Cyrus groped her not so white back up dancers? (The
Some took an even more seasoned route, using
temperance techniques to stop the sensational train in its tracks. In Rolling Stone's
initially deceptive write up, “It's Miley, Bitch: The Tongue
That Licked the World”, Rob Sheffield gave a more balanced account of the 2013
Video Music Awards, mentioning Cyrus almost in passing, and spending his time
taking equal shots at all the stars involved in what he said was MTV’s attempt
to make “sure this year’s VMA party was a real show. With a little help from
I ask again: What are we
creating when we allow objectivity to bend to the will of popular demand,
asking for glitter and jazz and sensationalized headlines? Nothing. We are
creating a secular sinkhole of informational access.
We lead our readers right back where they started.
says to me that there must be a change made. The truth is, we CAN stop. If we
Why can’t we create insight, rather than propagate fan
mongering, rather than cling to one star's fateful decision to wear her teddy
bear out that night? Let the reporters report and the readers decide. It’s now
or never. Robin Thicke will age (even more so, it seems) Miley Cyrus will
find Disney again (and a few more times after that), “Blurred Lines” will find
its way off the Billboard charts (catchy can only be caught for so long), but
the honest word —that will last for…at least a few more years.
by German Lopez
98 days ago
Medicaid expansion vote stalls, Lunken Airport mismanaged, streetcar spurs campaigns
Republican lawmakers say they won’t hold any votes on the Medicaid expansion until October or later,
even though state officials say the expansion must be approved by
October to have it in place by 2014. Implementing the expansion at the start of 2014 would coincide with the implementation
of other major programs in Obamacare. Gov. John Kasich supports the
expansion, but he’s had trouble convincing his fellow Republicans to
join him. The expansion would be mostly funded by the federal
government, which would pay for the entire policy for the first three
years then phase down to indefinitely paying for 90 percent of the cost.
Earlier this year, the Health Policy Institute of Ohio released an
analysis that found the Medicaid expansion would insure nearly half a
million Ohioans and save the state about $1.8 billion in the next
decade. Michigan, which is also dominated by Republicans, on Tuesday approved its own Medicaid expansion.
An internal audit found the city of Cincinnati has lost hundreds of thousands of dollars that could have gone toward improving the city-owned Lunken Airport through poor management and technology problems. In response, Councilman Chris Seelbach wrote on Twitter, “Lunken oversights
completely unacceptable. Meeting w/ City & Lunken Mngr to work on
detailed correction plan later this week.” The city is planning on
making changes that should avoid losing revenue in the future.
Streetcar supporters plan to hold a fundraiser
today for mayoral candidate Roxanne Qualls and City Council candidate
Wendell Young. The fundraiser shows the extra steps now being taken by
streetcar supporters, who have been proudly flaunting their support
every month through “streetcar socials,” the latest of which Mayor Mark Mallory attended. Ever since its inception, the streetcar has been mired in controversy and misrepresentations, which CityBeat covered in further detail here.
A central Ohio lawmaker is renewing a legislative push
for attaching drug tests to welfare benefits. The measure is meant to
lower costs and ensure welfare money isn’t going to drug dealers. As CityBeat previously covered,
the testing requirement can actually increase the cost of welfare
programs: In Florida, the state government’s program had a net loss of
$45,780 after it reimbursed all falsely accused welfare recipients of
their drug tests. Only 108 people out of the 4,086 accused, or 2.9
percent, tested positive, and most tested positive for marijuana,
according to The Miami Herald.
Heavy construction and improvements that will modernize and widen Interstate 75 are expected to continue for the next decade.
Much of the work is being funded by Kasich’s Ohio Turnpike plan, which
sells bonds that will be repaid with excess Turnpike polls.
Jeff Ruby yesterday responded to a lawsuit
filed on Monday against his restaurant chain. Ruby says his servers “are
highly compensated — averaging $65,000 a year, with shifts that average
seven hours a day.” The lawsuit alleges that management at Ruby’s
restaurants took tips from three employees, which supposedly left them
earning less than minimum wage.
United Way of Greater Cincinnati plans to raise $62.8 million with its campaign this year. The organization supports Cincinnati’s human services, which CityBeat covered in further detail here.
Google Glass could be used to improve surgeries in the future.
0 Comments · Friday, August 2, 2013
Pity local editors who must decide whether a distant medical and scientific study or discovery is newsworthy.
0 Comments · Tuesday, July 23, 2013
Northern Kentucky’s Sarah Jones is a statistic, one of
many public school teachers caught having sex with students. Jones’
conviction joins her local identity with “former Bengals cheerleader.” Now, she could become more widely known as winner of a
vexing First Amendment case.