Friday, May 25, 2012
workaround

Donate Now tile

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.




workaround



Triangle Park Creative

St. Paul forum focuses on citizens and the media

Mark Crispin Miller

September 17, 2006
In the wee hours of Saturday morning, three semi-celebrities arrived at Hamline University’s Sundin Hall teetering between Fashion Misfit and Political Nostradamus.

Caribou coffee in hand, Lizz Winstead, co-creator of the Daily Show, took the stage in thigh-high boots with dapper NYU Professor Mark Crispin Miller and public television executive producer John Forde. As the three sat down to face the crowd, Forde’s red plastic basketball shoes peeked from below his dark gray suit as he introduced his two guests and acted as moderator for a heated discussion about “The Future of News.”

Presented by the Twin Cities Media Alliance, publishers of the Twin Cities Daily Planet, the three-hour event in St. Paul was developed to bring the Twin Cities community together to discuss local and national media in an attempt to encourage people in and out of the media profession to engage in citizen journalism. The discussion was broken up into three parts, with panelists from national news sources, local mainstream journalism, and small, community-based media. A moderator was chosen for each panel to keep discussions on track.

“There is extreme laziness in the media.” Mark Crispin Miller stated, as the day began with talk of corporate-run media and the need for media reform. Miller, author of several books, including, Boxed In: The Culture of TV, spoke with venom of the state of journalism in the country, lacing his comments with politically liberal overtones and inciting near-rage from several audience members. Writer and comedian Lizz Winstead seconded his comments, saying that it is journalists’ job to look at both sides of an issue and then investigate, which isn’t happening now, particularly in television journalism.

“There is no investigative journalism [on TV]," said Winstead. "[Journalists] are just rehashing, they’re not reporting.” Part of the problem, said Winstead and Miller, is the fact that large corporations pay big money to media houses for advertising, which keeps certain publications afloat but also makes them dependant on a Big Brother watchdog. One example is NBC, which is owned by General Electric, one of the wealthiest companies in the nation. What corporations say, goes, which affects the stories being published—or not. “If you look at corporate-run media based on advertising, you’re not going to get the truth,” says Winstead.

Another obstacle in publishing the truth in national newspapers and magazines is governmental control of the media. Of course, America has the right to free speech, but reporters have been known to get calls from the president himself, urging them to tell a story with a particular bent, or not at all. Saying “no” to big corporations is possible if you’re willing to forego the money, but it’s a bit trickier to say “no” to the president. “The government will do what it wants to do,” said Miller, “They’re there in spite us.”

Miller went on to say that the best years of journalism were between 1880 and 1912 when journalists were solely responsible for exposing corruption that directly led to change. This pure journalism, oftentimes referred to as “objectivity,” is relatively non-existent now, according to Miller and Winstead. Miller reiterated the thought of many present-day journalists in saying, “there’s no such thing as objectivity.”

What can be done to change the one-sided, corporate and government-run news of today? Miller suggested that “things are going to be intolerably bad” in the near future and that the only way to rectify the situation is by treating the source: U.S. politics. There needs to be election, campaign finance and media reform so that important, equal journalism gets to the public without running through a filter first. Winstead understands how many people are getting their news from the Internet and believes citizens can take a more active role in informing themselves. By asking questions about the news, readers can do Google searches for things they want to know more about, and find news themselves. Although the internet does take readers away from print media, it opens doors to information in ways print media never will be able to do.

The discussion ended with a livelier than usual question-and-answer session where the more conservative members of the audience were able to voice their discontent with the direction the discussion took, and others could learn the secrets of the media world. One man asked why anchors constantly dodged and glossed over questions posed to them on the news. John Forde laughed while explaining that to “avoid the question” is a large part of media training. “It’s a PR tactic.”

As the three panelists left the stage, they were swarmed by audience members eager to share their thoughts and ask more questions. After a short break, Marco Fernandez Landoni of LCN Media led the second panel in “Citizens and the Mainstream Media,” featuring the Star Tribune’s Kate Parry, KARE 11 photographer/editor Jeff Kraker, former columnist and business editor of the Pioneer Press Dave Beal, current editor of the Pioneer Press Thom Fladung, and Bill Wareham, deputy news director for Minneapolis Public Radio.

Fending off criticism about their white male, middle-class newsrooms, the panelists worked hard to defend themselves in front of a merciless crowd. Disagreeing often with the first panel, they explained the difficulty in broaching language barriers within the Twin Cities community, developing a diverse reporting staff and working to open a dialogue among all Twin Cities citizens so that the news is about the people ingesting it.

“People in communities should be highlighted in papers in a way that is meaningful to them,” said Kate Parry of the Star Tribune. Instead of telling those communities “who they are,” the Twin Cities media should be working to explain their issues to the public and giving them a voice because they are the Twin Cities.

Thom Fladung, former managing editor of the Detroit Free Press, agreed with the audience about the lack of diversity in Twin Cities newsrooms and in the Twin Cities in general. “You’re more diverse than you ever were…but you’re not that diverse.” At the Star Tribune, groups are brought in to work with editors on cultural sensitivity, and editors from small community newspapers often come to give advice about how to get the voices of minority populations into mainstream media. Parry realizes, however, that one discussion can’t attain total competency in knowledge of diversity.

“The whole staff has to have a cultural education that’s complete," said Parry. "You can’t have one ‘ethnic’ person speak for everyone in that community.”

The discussion touched on similar topics from the first panel, including the lack of investigative journalism in the mainstream media today. Investigative teams are being reduced and newspapers are expected to crank out stories like machines, instead of taking the time to do thorough reporting on specific issues.

In a session that seemed more about defending oneself than working for greater journalistic change, the panel of mainstream media professionals ended with a question and answer session. The group moved off the stage, seeming somewhat defeated, to let the final panel arrange themselves for a discussion on “Citizens and Community-Based Media.”

The last panel included six charismatic members of the local media community: Ann Alquist, News Director at KFAI Radio, Abdi Aynte, writer and editor of Hiiraan Online, Anne Bretts of Northfield.org, Ramon Hough, co-host of the Filipino-American National News on KFAI, Mike Wassenaar, executive director at Saint Paul Neighborhood Network, and Tracey Williams, president of the Minnesota Spokesman-Recorder newspaper.

Although the panel represented very different populations, including the Somali, Latino, Filipino and African American communities, they all shared similar difficulties in reaching their target audiences. Moderator Fernandez Landoni expressed the challenge of trying to reach an ever-growing Latino community in the Twin Cities with people moving in various directions. Some Latinos have just arrived in the U.S. and speak no English, others have lived here for years and are fairly immersed, while others were born here, have dispersed throughout the Twin Cities and hardly associate with the Latino community at all. LCN Media struggles to find a way to communicate with all these sub-communities within the larger Latino community without losing anyone.

Abdi Aynte agreed that reaching out to the Somali community has been difficult. His Web site, Hiiraan Online used to be mostly in Somali but is now being read more and more by English speaking Somali-Americans. Because of demand and a desire to serve the community better, the Web site is publishing more articles in English than ever before. There is always the fear, however, that some members of the community won’t get the information they need because of language problems or a lack of internet availability. Tracey Williams of the Spokesman-Recorder understands that not all African Americans, who are the focus of her publication, have Internet at home and therefore, may not be able to access certain information. Because of this reason, small community newspapers have to work extremely hard to decide what they will publish and how they will reach their target audience.

After a day of media analysis, there was a slight sense of hopelessness. With all the issues surrounding the media today, it seemed as if there was no way to pull the media up by its bootstraps and out of the doldrums. It wasn’t until an audience member fished for optimism that the panel was forced to end the day on a positive note. A young woman asked if journalism was a worthy career field to pursue or if the only outcome was to become disillusioned. Here, the panel fought for airtime and became immediately impassioned by this threat on their profession. Mike Wassenaar asked, “Do you want to make a change in the world for the better?” If so, he said, journalism was still the preferred choice. By making contacts with people from different communities and sharing their stories, others are able to learn about important issues that may otherwise go untold. Journalism, like so few fields, uses the power of words to create change, and the first place any citizen journalist can start is with themselves.

Lizz Winstead said it best when she stated that it is every person’s responsibility to take part in creating the news, regardless if he or she is a paid journalist or not. With the influx of blogging and the internet, everyone has a voice.

“If nothing else,” she said, “we must always ask questions.”

Colette Davidson's picture
Colette Davidson

Colette Davidson (colettedav@hotmail.com) is a freelance writer for the TC Daily Planet and a former assistant editor of the Uptown Neighborhood News, now living in France.

Article Tags:

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Colette is a little

Colette is a little confused. The journalism done in the 1890s to about 1912 was anything but what is currently called 'objective' reporting. These 'muckrakers' exposed the evils of big corporations. Examples are: Upton Sinclair's The Jungle (about the slaughterhouses in Chicago) and Ida Tarbell's expose of the Standard Oil Company. "Objectivity" in the modern journalistic sense is quoting two sides on every story and then leaving the reader to figure out what is what. Taking this idea to extremes, an 'objective' journalist would ask Hitler why he was destroying the Jews and then ask the Jews what they thought of Hitler. Or a journalist would feel compelled to include the opinion of a Holocaust denier in a story about the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC. The problem with this kind of 'objective' reporting is that reporters pretend they don't know or care what has been said earlier. So you can't ask Dick Cheney whether he lied when he said that "we would be welcomed in Iraq with flowers" or whether he is lying when he says he didn't say that. Only if you can find a prominent Democrat to say that Cheney is lying, can you report that the vice president said different things at different times.

BGroeneveld is right on

BGroeneveld is right on except for the last sentence. "Only if you can find a prominent Democrat to say that Cheney is lying, can you report that the vice president said different things at different times." Alas, if a Democrat says Cheney is lying, that's being partisan and it will be reported as Democrats (at their peril) attacking the administration. And at least until very recently, there would then be a quote from some pundit or lame consultant saying that challenging the admnistration will doom the Democrats to defeat because the public wants a more positive view......because the public wants to support the president.....because the public is sick of finger-pointing (if it's done by Democrats. If it's done by Repubicans, it's patriotic.) In the pundit/Beltway/corporate press world, the Democrats are always dooming themselves by challenging Republicans. But I digress. So in fact, under the national corporate news, only if you can find a prominent REPUBLICAN to say that Cheney is lying, can you report that the vice president said different things at different times.

Thank you for your comments.

Thank you for your comments. After reading through the passage you are referring to, I understand that what I wrote could be a bit confusing. If I could go back, I would perhaps change some of the wording to make things clearer, if only to protect my intelligence! However, it was Mark Crispin Miller who said that the the best years of journalism, "objective journalism" specifically, were during that period, for the reasons mentioned above, and not me making a loose interpretation. I apologize for not making that clearer. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

This is nitpicky, but the

This is nitpicky, but the wee hours of Saturday were from 1 am until about 4 am.

yawn... very easy to have

yawn... very easy to have pundits and comics talk about media when they're not in the trenches. then they walk away heroes. when have i ever seen communities of color support minority journalists in minnesota? i've worked here 16 years, and i can count the number of people who are regular community news feeders to the black, native or asian reporters that are at news stations. the only time we hear from them is when they call to tell us we're uncle toms, sell outs or complain their boss is a racist. hey -- my bosses have been racists, too! where do you think we live? and when discouraged reporters leave, or minority anchors get fired/let go... where are you protesting? we make up 22% of the twin cities population... you can't stand up for one face of color on your screen? i am reluctant to do panels such as this anymore, because it's a gang up on reporters. we are the only workforce that reports our own mistakes, as well as your weary mantra that "the media is evil"... where did you think that saying came from, 20 years ago? the reagan admin. started it -- one of the most corrupt governments we've had, next to the house of bush/saud... the government who hid the iran contra scandal, did nothing for aids sufferers -- the majority black women... reluctantly signed king's birthday into national law after much pressure... struck down affirmative action... tried to limit a woman's rights on her body... did nothing for aids research, said crack was more dangerous than coke, because black folks sold it in order to live because unemployment was through the roof... ended school lunch programs, sex ed programs in schools, turned the mentally ill out on the street -- AND THE MEDIA'S EVIL??? we don't need more amateur journalists with their blogs... we need eyes and ears that contact minority journalists regularly... we need community groups to petition and threaten to take away sponsor dollars from stations -- the power is GREEN, black people. wake up!! don't applaud when the media shows up at community meetings, and black leaders send us away! and what about our so-called community leaders? when do they get held to task by the community... 15 years since tycel nelson's death, and i still hear the same rhetoric. WAKE THE HELL UP!! AND TAKE PERSONAL REPONSIBILITY!! SUPPORT YOUR MINORITY JOURNALIST IN THE MAJORITY-CONTROLLED MEDIA!! peace, and sorry for going off... angry black woman, here... :) robyne robinson

Journalists and critics are in this together

I understand the frustrations that journalists feel when they work hard to do the best job they can, struggle with the pressures and constraints of their work environment, and then show up at a forum to hear their work criticized by outsiders. Such events can certainly devolve into a "gang up on reporters" or "the media is evil" onslaught that only dismays working reporters and editors and makes them even more defensive. But often (in my experience) this is largely the failure of critics to precisely articulate the problems that concern them. Rarely, I think, are the complaints really about the work or character of any individual reporter, even if they sound that way. The problems are almost always systemic, and usually have more to do with economic, organizational or political pressures than individual performance. In this sense, journalists and critics are often unhappy with the same things, and should be working together to push for an environment in which journalists can do good work. Sparring between serious journalists and media critics just distracts from discussing the most important issues affecting media and journalism today.

Dave Beal was kind enough to

Dave Beal was kind enough to send in the following thoughts via email to the Daily Planet office the other day: First off, congratulations for tackling such a broad and important but difficult topic. So many perspectives, so little time. That's what we had to deal with when we put together an "End of News" panel early year for SPJ. Even with two hours, we ended up with lots of loose ends/thoughts unfinished, etc., because we took on such a big topic. The panels were probably as good as could have been expected. We all probably wished we could have had more time, but that's the way it goes with panels -- everybody wants to get their commercial in. I think the mainstream media panelists appreciated the opportunity to do that, particularly before an audience probably more tuned in to alternative media. I learned some things, even at my seasoned age, from the citizens/community-based panel panel. I went to the Somali Web site and was very impressed with its scope and sophistication. It was almost worth coming to the whole thing just for the opportunity to learn about that site. Being a business journalist, I was waiting for, but didn't hear, much discussion from either panel on what's happening with the "business models" for either the MSM or the citizens/community operations. Perhaps that could be something for you to look at in the future. The move to niche advertising and the likes of Google (for classified ads) is hammering away at mass media "business models," but my sense is that a lot of the new media business models are still pretty weak -- dependent on foundation grants, etc. So to the extent that MSM outlets fail, do the blogs and other forms of new media really have the wherewithall to seriously supplant or replace traditional outlets? Simply put, where is journalism headed? I don't think we know. As for the conversation about the future of news, I think Lizz is funny. I'm a Comedy Hour fan. But she certainly didn't seem to challenge Mark Crispin Miller's view that it might be a really good thing if we moved back into the age of partisan journalism and away from objective journalism -- some think that's where we're headed. There's certainly a lot about objective journalism to criticize, but we should be careful what we wish for. I think a reinvention of the partisan journalism era could be very bad, given the technology and pressure groups and polarization that abound today. We could end up with virtually every media outlet simply spinning one line or another, without any of them truly searching for the truth. Often journalists with very decided perspectives/biases can do objective journalism quite well. A couple of decades ago, Wall Street Journal reporter A. Kent Macdougall did a terrific job covering the media beat. So good were his articles that the Journal packaged them up and reprinted them in book form. Twice. Then it came out that he was a member of the Socialist Party, I think, in Time magazine. Of course the Journal, fearful of an adverse reaction from its many conservative readers, fired him. But MacDougall argued that because of his political persuasion, he knew how to ask really probing questions and thus he got great interviews and was a better journalist. I read some of his pieces for the Journal. They were great. It's easy to criticize objective journalism, but a lot harder to find anything better. Dave Beal

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p> <br> <img> <span> <div>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use [google_ad:ad_slot] to display Google Admanager ads within your content.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
workaround

Free Speech Zone

The Free Speech Zone offers a space for contributions from readers, without editing by the TC Daily Planet. This is an open forum for articles that otherwise might not find a place for publication, including news articles, opinion columns, and announcements. The opinions expressed in the Free Speech Zone and Neighborhood Notes, as well as the opinions of bloggers, are their own and not necessarily the opinion of the TC Daily Planet.

Click here to see a display of Twin Cities problem reports, from potholes to neighborhood eyesores. Click here to report a problem. Have you used SeeClickFix? Have you gotten any response from city officials? Let us know - email info@tcdailyplanet.net