Tag Archives: journalism

March 21, 2018 · 8:41 am

In reply: “Gone Missing” Letter to the Editor

In Re: Curriculum for the 21st Century: a reply to C.D. Rinck Sr.’s Letter to the Editor, March 21, 2018.

D. Rinck of Mission, KS, has a valid point. He asked, “ What happened to all those government checks and balances I was taught in high school?”

He goes on reflecting on his own education, “”They must have suffered the same fate as diagramming a sentence as I learned in English Class.”

Rinck should be concerned. Having taught for nearly 30 years before retiring in 2015, I have taught both—how to diagram sentences and the US Constitution. I also taught journalism.

The Constitution provides the clear separation of powers as a means of preventing any one branch from taking control. The checks and balance system is critical to a democracy including the republican democracy of the United States.

At no point should one branch have power over any other branch. In Sen. Jeff Flake’s comments to the National Press Club last week, the same topic of checks and balance is referenced.

Flake said, “Defending democratic institutions ought not to be a controversial idea, and hasn’t been until very recently. But recognizing that our institutions are under threat from within, with clarity, seems to me a basic obligation of the Article I branch of government—the congress, whose power is, in theory, equal to that of the president’s…”

Jennifer Rubin, from The Washington Post, was published in the KC Star editorial, “The problem: Flake can’t win in today’s Trump GOP” also focused on checks and balance.

American textbooks include the principle of checks and balance as a primary theme to be taught in civics and government classes. The class used to be taught juniors not freshmen as it is today. (And as an aside, I question whether freshmen are developmentally prepared to discuss the theory or to fully comprehend the value of the US Constitution.)

The American checks and balance system has also included an additional watchdog—freedom of speech that includes professional journalism. I taught journalism as the social responsibility as I was taught at MU during the mid-1970s. Journalists are to report the news objectively not subjectively, unless in editorials.

Our schools must teach students how to be critical readers, good communicators, and independent thinkers. I am concerned that emphasizing technology education and student achievement testing undermines what education must be.

Language curriculum needs to include sentence diagramming again. Diagramming teaches students how words communicate. Students need to understand value of the word, the difference in denotative and connotative meanings, and how to write clear statements. Sentence diagramming teaches analysis of language.

An example of applying critical reading and understanding language’s structure as evidenced in today’s KC Star article, “Trump’s phone call to Putin raises hackles,” about the President congratulatory phone call to Putin included one biased word: stubborn. Look at the paragraph.

“Trumps comments came five days after the White House imposed sanctions on Russia for its meddling in the 2016 election and other “malicious cyber-attacks.’ It widened what has become a familiar gulf between the Trump administration’s tougher actions and words toward Russia and Trump’s own stubborn reluctance to criticize Putin.”

Let the facts speak without adding the opinion.

Of course, our school’s curriculum and the emphasis placed on education must be a priority for our society, too. Our students will be left behind if the curriculum does not teach the skills to be critical readers, analytical thinkers, and good communicators.

Leave a comment

Filed under Education, History & Government, journalism

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 6, 2018 · 1:45 pm

1968! 2018 . . . 2068

Yes, I am a little slow tuning in to some of the more contemporary and cultural trends. But in January, I read the article in the USA Today for January 22, 2018. Seeing ‘1968’ on that page I suddenly realized the significance.  Fifty years separated that 1968 from today’s 2018.

IMG_2117

Needless to say, I had to put it into perspective.  I was a freshman in high school and had decided that I wanted to go into journalism–to make a difference.  We were in Vietnam.  We were in the throes of civil rights changes.  And I was growing up in the Midwest on a family farm.

My viewpoint was idealistic.  I have often been accused of being a “pollyanna’ and I accept that.  I probably still am.  I always look for the positives and hate to admit that the realities can be devastating.  I want to see the good.

But I am also a news junkie.  I could watch the news all morning, at noon, during the evening news and even the 10 pm news.  I want to know what is going on.  I have even explained that being a journalist was a way to be legally nosey.

But back to 1968.  I read the USA Today article and saved it.  There is so much in there to absorb.  I do not think we should ignore the enormous changes that have occurred in our society that began there and have defined today.  The article is worthy of rereading.

Then another surprise.  In the mail came a gift subscription to the Smithsonian and what was the cover!  1968!  The headline with the year, “The Year that Shattered America.”  Fifty years ago, events made the news and many were just experiencing the news instantly broadcast–in full color–right into our living rooms.

How, in 50 years, could a society change so radically.  I am sure it has to do with the immediacy of news, but also consider all the changes in how families function–or dysfunction.  Think about the changes in industry.  Think about priorities.  Think about faith.

The past 50 years have sped past us and if the magazine Smithsonian is right, we are a shattered culture. I, in my naivety, want to see that in 50 years, we are still a fluid society, shifting and changing to meet our community standards.  The community, now, though really is global and the political boundaries cannot keep the flow of ideas confined.

Today’s 2018 community has the potential of promoting a global culture that finds the value of the individual and the unique cultures that circle this world.  Surely the political and the corporate world should lead by valuing individuals and the cultures from which they come.  If they don’t, then I sadly could see how 2018 could become the year that shattered our global community by 2068.

Leave a comment

Filed under History & Government

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

February 20, 2018 · 8:38 pm

Journalism training rules

Reading the KC Star’s opinion column from Thomas L. Friedman of the New York Times News Service,  I was reminded of some very important rules that the Mizzou’s School of Journalism included in our training.  My degree was in news ed, and the Columbian Missourian instructors really hammered at us to use some very primary rules of reporting:

  1.  Follow the money.  Whenever trying to investigate a story that seemed questionable, follow the money.  Another words, looking at city, county, state, or federal government, follow the money.  If an individual was living differently than one might anticipate for their position, follow the money.  If an organization, especially when using public money, could not explain its budget, follow the money.
  2. Get the story from three different sources.  If a reporter can substantiate a story from three different sources, the likelihood is that there is a true story to report.  Of course, the reporter must be responsible enough to locate three different, unrelated sources to substantiate the story.
  3. Check your quotes.  When taking notes, make sure they are accurate even checking them with the person before walking away.  When using a direct quote, read it back to that person to make sure it is accurate and to let them know that you are planning on using it.  When using an indirect quote, also check it with the person being quoted.

Needless to say, journalists have taken a beating considering the entire tirade calling the news “fake.”  But, I firmly believe that trained journalists who remain faithful to the Canons of Journalism, the Journalist’s Creed, and the principles the universities taught, are reporting real news.  If they are responsible, then no one can support such accusations.

Sadly, the immediacy in which the news is transmitted leads to mistakes–many times a listener’s misunderstanding rather than the report.  At all cost, the headlines need to be direct and unbiased.  Listeners need to turn to fuller reports whether through further web research or through more traditional sources as the written word in newspapers and magazines (which are sadly unable to sustain the cost of publication).

Recently a news article concerning the deportation of a professor more fully explained the circumstances that lead to ICE’s attempt to deport him.  The story continues, but as so often is the case, the full story is not able to be broadcast in the 30-60 second sound bites.  The story is complicated, and it takes study to follow and understand it.  We still do not have the whole story, I am afraid.

But back to Friedman’s editorial, Whatever Trump is hiding is hurting all Americans now. Regardless of one’s personal stand, the article reminds us to follow the money.  In our government, serving in an elected position places one’s life under the microscope.  If reporters cannot follow the money, that leaves so many questions unanswered.

My fear is that by the labeling of news as fake, the work of our journalists is compromised.  If the profession of journalism is not allowed to function freely in our democracy, then how can we check the three branches of our government.  We need ethical journalists to keep our elected officials accountable now, just as we did during Watergate.

Leave a comment

Filed under History & Government

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 13, 2016 · 2:20 pm

Journalism’s Paradigm Shift?

Paradigms are long held beliefs that become truths in our lives.  This week I have been considering some of the paradigms that have been shattered, cracked, replaced, or altered.  One really disturbs me this week and that is the definition or JOURNALISM.

Trained as a journalist at the University of Missouri graduating in 1976 with a BJ in news ed, I am offended by what has evolved in the profession.  This week, I have become incensed enough to speak out.

Journalism is–now was–a profession that served as a watchdog for the public.  The journalist was trained to maintain objectivity, honesty, and fair play.  In the past 15 years, the profession has deteriorated.

This week one of the oldest programs in journalism sent its entire anchor team to attend the Golden Globes.  The amount of time and money this production commanded may seem appropriate but I disagree.

The emphasis professional journalists now place on following the Hollywood characters now places them into an entirely different career category.  The journalists are now part of the paparazzi.  Journalists are even being marketed as Hollywood personalities themselves becoming part of the story they are suppose to be covering.

The pride I had in earning my journalism degree from MU has now dwindled as I witness the deterioration of the profession.  At a time when the political parties are failing the constituents and the government is seldom a unifying factor for the people, journalism needs to serve as the fourth branch of the government once again.

The journalism profession must repair its image.  The journalists must check themselves that they are maintaining the Canons of Journalism rather than destroying the integrity of the profession.

During the Spanish-American War, the term yellow journalism described the less ethical  behaviors of journalists.  During early 20th century, many journalists formed the paradigm of journalism that established a trust between the public and the reporters.  Now, what does the public do?  Who can the public trust?  Can the profession rebuild its character and regain public trust?

A challenge:  Journalism schools must evaluate how thoroughly the canons are taught.  Checking sources must be required.  Professors and Editors must accept the responsibility to require veracity, check sources, and insist on quality final products.

I long to tout the journalism profession once again.  I need to find reasons to proudly declare myself as a trained journalist, a trained educator, and now a UMC local pastor.  These three professions can co-exist as long as the foundation is ethically maintained and the purpose is to maintain the democratic culture which birthed journalism.  The paradigm needs to be maintained even though the methods of communicating the news continue to improve so everybody has

The Canons of Journalism:  [Accessed on January 13, 2016 at http://ethics.iit.edu/ecodes/node/4457.%5D

American Society of Newspaper Editors (1923)

The primary function of newspapers is to communicate to the human race what its members do, feel and think. Journalism, therefore, demands of its practitioners the widest range of intelligence, or knowledge, and of experience, as well as natural and trained powers of observation and reasoning. To its opportunities as a chronicle are indissolubly linked its obligations as teacher and interpreter.

To the end of finding some means of codifying sound practice and just aspirations of American journalism, these canons are set forth:

I. RESPONSIBILITY: The right of a newspaper to attract and hold readers is restricted by nothing but considerations of public welfare. The use a newspaper makes of the share of public attention it gains serves to determine its sense of responsibility, which it shares with every member of its staff. A journalist who uses his power for any selfish or otherwise unworthy purpose is faithless to a high trust.

II. FREEDOM OF THE PRESS: Freedom of the press is to be guarded as a vital right of mankind. It is the unquestionable right to discuss whatever is not explicitly forbidden by law, including the wisdom of any restrictive statute.

III. INDEPENDENCE: Freedom from all obligations except that of fidelity to the public interest is vital.

1. Promotion of any private interest contrary to the general welfare, for whatever reason, is not compatible with honest journalism. So-called news communications from private sources should not be published without public notice of their source or else substantiation of their claims to value as news, both in form and substance.

2. Partisanship, in editorial comment which knowingly departs from the truth, does violence to the best spirit of American journalism; in the news columns it is subversive of a fundamental principle of the profession.

IV. SINCERITY, TRUTHFULNESS, ACCURACY: Good faith with the reader is the foundation of all journalism worthy of the name.

1. By every consideration of good faith a newspaper is constrained to be truthful. It is not to be excused for lack of thoroughness or accuracy within its control, or failure to obtain command of these essential qualifies.

2. Headlines should be fully warranted by the contents of the articles which they surmount.

V. IMPARTIALITY: Sound practice makes clear distinction between news reports and expressions of opinion. News reports should be free from opinion or bias of any kind.

1. This rule does not apply to so-called special articles unmistakably devoted to advocacy or characterized by a signature authorizing the writer’s own conclusions and interpretation.

VI. FAIR PLAY: A newspaper should not publish unofficial charges affecting reputation or moral character without opportunity given to the accused to be heard ; right practice demands the giving of such opportunity in all cases of serious accusation outside judicial proceedings.

1. A newspaper should not involve private rights or feeling without sure warrant of public right as distinguished from public curiosity.

2. It is the privilege, as it is the duty, of a newspaper to make prompt and complete correction of its own serious mistakes of fact or opinion, whatever their origin.

DECENCY: A newspaper cannot escape conviction of insincerity if while professing high moral purpose it supplies incentives to base conduct, such as are to be found in details of crime and vice, publication of which is not demonstrably for the general good- Lacking authority to enforce its canons the journalism here represented can but express the hope that deliberate pandering to vicious instincts will encounter effective public disapproval or yield to the influence of a preponderant professional condemnation.

Leave a comment

Filed under Paradigm Shifts

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

February 6, 2012 · 2:10 am

Telling the story: Daniel in the Lion’s Den

given on Sunday, February 5, 2012

Telling the Story:  Daniel & the Lions’ Den

Do you know your lions’ den?

 

Today’s Old Testament story is not as difficult to believe as the others we have reviewed, but figuring out how it fits into the New Testament much less into our 21st century lives is a challenge.  Why should we continue to tell the story?

That is how I began thinking about this story.  Why should we tell it to our family and friends much less others who do not have God as part of their lives?  As I turned to my Bible assortment and references, I began searching for an answer.  There it was:  a question:  “Do you sometimes feel like a misfit?”

Daniel was living in exile.  He was making his life away from his large faith family.  He did have his friends, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, but they were certainly tested.  Why Daniel’s friends were even thrown into a fiery furnace, but they were delivered because they refused to give up their faith in God.

The people followed pagan practices praying to various gods, golden images and even the king.  They could not understand the faith of the Jewish exiles who were not following the practices of the culture in which they were living.  Much less, these men were finding favor in the king’s eyes.  Jealousy developed and the distrustful local leaders began plotting against the Jewish exiles.

Daniel maintained his own Jewish faith and practices.  These very practices are what lead him in his daily life.  He applied the principles in all that he did, he performed his job so successfully that he continued to outshine all the other government figures.  The king, much less three kings, found that his work was far better than anybody else’s.  The kings learned that he could be trusted, that his superior work led to more success, and even his own demeanor was something to be respected.

Undoubtedly Daniel did feel like a misfit.  He was in an unfamiliar culture, working with pagans, living through one king’s rule after another, and yet he maintained his own faith, his own lifestyle, and his own character.  Even though Daniel was the misfit in the local community, he remained faithful to God.

Here we live in a culture where our faith does not isolate us, and yet we may feel like misfits, too.  How, you ask?

Well, consider our daily lives today.  We live in communities that are filled with problems.  We step out of our homes and go to work where all too often we find our personal ethics challenged.  We get involved in our hobbies—sometimes to excess.  We decide to spend an evening out and are easily swayed to drink too much or to gamble too much, why we even eat too much.

Do we sometimes feel like misfits in any of these situations or do we “join the crowd” and begin doing what everybody else is doing?  Sometimes we do it because we do not see the danger in the behaviors.  Sometimes we do it because we do not want to seem different from the others.  Sometimes we do it because we forget to apply God’s rules.

The result is that we may not feel like a misfit for the moment, but as we review the events we may begin to feel uncomfortable with our choices.  Maybe we even feel guilty and ask God for his forgiveness.  These are the reasons we tell Daniel’s story of being thrown into a lions den.

Daniel did not turn away from God.  Despite living in exile among pagans, and despite working a job where others did not practice ethics, Daniel lived an honest, faithful life.  His work was exemplary.  His interpretations of the dreams were accurate even if it was hurtful.  He was trusted.  He was promoted to the top of the other governors because he was that good.  The kings were able to look past his faith and focus on his work and his personality.  He was not a misfit by the kings’ evaluations; he was a model of integrity.

Today we tell the story of Daniel and the lions’ den as a way to make sure our children and even ourselves remember the importance of remaining true to God.  We all are thrown into a lions’ den.  We all become misfits at some time or another.  Daniel’s story is a model to us of how to keep God-centered.

Living in the 21st century when all the media, all the workplaces, and all the society around us screams at us to follow the crowd.  Do whatever it takes to make a buck.  Take care of yourself only.  We may live in a society that was established on individual freedoms, but we are living like we are slaves to the materialistic culture around us.

Daniel may have been tossed into an actual lions’ den, but I propose that we are all living in a lion’s den—even if it is allegorical.  Can we identify our personal lions’ den?  I believe that maintaining my faith protects me from the lions in today’s culture.

My first professional job after college was to work for a newspaper.  Even though it was just a local paper rather than a nationally known publication, I was proud to be a journalist.  The role was interesting and I did enjoy it until the principles taught in journalism school were challenged.

In 1976, our country’s bicentennial year, I entered the work force firmly believing that I could save the world as a journalist.   I jumped at the chance to work on a local newspaper.  I had been taught the canons of journalism at one of the most reputable journalism colleges in the nation—MU.  I was confident that those principles along with my faith would make it possible to change the world.

At least that is what I thought until I faced the cruel truth of business.  Newspapers can survive, as all forms of media can, based on circulation.  The more subscriptions a newspaper has, the more it can charge for advertising.  The more subscriptions, the more likely businesses will buy advertising.  Even journalism, the fourth branch of government—after legislative, executive and judicial—was dependent on numbers!

Sad to say, after almost a year I discovered that my personal ethics as a journalist were challenged.  I was asked/told to sign a document that verified the subscription count for the newspaper.  The numbers on that document were greatly inflated.  I felt trapped.  Either sign the paper or risk being fired.  Signing the paper went against all my training and my personal standards.

The requirement of a job forced me to reconsider my own career.  I chose to leave the job and changed to teaching.  Surely in teaching journalism I could make a difference in the world.  In teaching, I would not be at risk of being a misfit.

The boss was my lion.  A person who did not follow God’s law was devouring me.  He was lying in order to get more money.  He was placing me in a position of jeopardy, too.  My idealistic world was challenged, and I felt like I had been tossed into the lions’ den.

Each of us is a misfit in today’s society.  Each of us must handle a den of lions at some point in our lives.  Daniel is our model.  We need to tell Daniel’s story as a method to reinforce our teachings.  Our children need to learn how to maintain their values even when living among others who do not.  Our young workers need to learn that being honest and trustworthy on the job is more important than playing games with other workers.  Business leaders need to remember that operating a successful business depends on honest dealings and great customer service rather than shortcuts or shoddy workmanship.

The Apologetics Bible includes four lessons from the book of Daniel.  They may seem simple, but think about what a difference these four lessons would make in today’s culture:

  1. Don’t be surprised when you encounter opposition to your beliefs.
  2. Don’t take what belongs to God and give it to anyone or anything else.
  3. Don’t let the world seduce you away from what you know is right.

Daniel was thrown into a lions’ den after Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were thrown into a furnace.  All were misfits, yet they lived by their faith.  God is by our side all the time.  His commandment is our overriding principle under which all decisions should be made.  If we truly live our faith and practice, we are rewarded.  Others can reward us in our earthly lives for jobs well done, but most importantly God rewards us with eternal life.

Jesus, himself, knew Daniel’s story.  He was thrown into the lions’ den after just three years preaching, teaching, and healing.  His lions were even his own people—the Pharisees and the priests.  He was thrown away on a cross, but even then God lifted him up into heaven beside him.  Are you able to keep your faith among all the lions of today?  The reward is priceless.

Dear Loving Father,

We know lions are living all around us,

     help us identify them.

Once we identify the lions,

     help us stay strong in our faith.

Guide us daily to develop our practices

     so we can testify to others

     the rewards of loving one another.

May we be 21st century Daniels

     working to transform this world.

Amen

Leave a comment

Filed under Religion

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,