I have been kidding around about the newspaper (see post below this one) but it really has me distressed. As much as I criticize the Miami Herald, I can’t imagine life here in Miami without it: an independent news source that actually pays reporters to dig up evil doings. Well, I guess I can imagine what it would be like, Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News. I wonder how editorials are doing over at the Wall Street Journal now? We would be seeing news through the eyes of whomever has the money to spare to buy the paper. That is not news. That is propaganda.
Governor Blagojevich of Illinois, among other things tried to intimidate a failing newspaper. He told the Chicago Tribune that the Illinois Finance Authority would only assist in the sale of Wrigley Field (one of the Tribune’s cash cows) if the paper fired its editorial board. Newspapers need to be independent, this is an example of what money woes can do to our quest for truth. What if the paper had agreed to his demands? He would not have been criticized any longer, the public would not know the truth about him.
I am not much for actual thinking today, but you get my drift, my fear: A Lobbyist/Developer/Power Broker owned newspaper. And, maybe worse, all the money woes today will influence the career choices of brilliant students, away from journalism tomorrow.
2 years ago
6 comments:
And then you get Parkland (beyond the UDB), you get U.S. Sen. Jeb Bush (based beyond the UDB), you get developers running the state (money from beoynd the UDB). Wait a minute, that's what we face WITH the Miami Herald.
At lease the Miami Herald shines a light on these things and informs the community and usually comes out against the County Commission actions in an editorial.
You wouldn't even know about them if not for the Herald...and us.
Agreed. With the fervent wish that they'd be better. And with the doubt it can happen as they retrench and downsize and outsource to India.
I am still stunned that the paper would outsource editing to India.
As nice as those folks may be in in India, they have to miss the nuances of what they are reading, because they are not from here.
If they don't miss the colloquialisms of the English Language as spoken by the different regions of the US, then the Indian editors may very well still misread the intent of a reporters story if they are not personally familiar with the area or region that the article is referencing.
It seems like the reporters would go nuts watching their stories have the "point" missed and re-edited from a world away.
As a retired reporter (AP, 25 years) I can only sympathize with reporters whose carefully considered words will be turned into something different by copy editors who don't start off in the same shoes or frame of mind, much less the same continent.
Larry:
I know you must cringe at the thought of outsourcing such as that.
Post a Comment