Arizona State University journalism Professor Tim McGuire only last week had criticized Gannett's Arizona Republic for downplaying a national controversy over the state's new immigration bill.
After Sunday's rare, front page editorial, however, McGuire writes today: "For me, the primary accomplishment of the Republic editorial was its clear effort to spot and label the raw, political cynicism that is driving politicians in the spring of 2010. When the editors put the hammer to nine Arizona politicians it is clear those pols had the opportunity to choose good and to choose solutions to the problem. Instead, as the Republic points out, they have chosen the expedient and the cynical."
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
8 comments:
Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Republic editorial team is behind the curve and has been for some time. It no longer leads public discourse, and largely has lost any influence it held among pols and pundits. SB1070 was a long time in coming and could've been headed off months ago, had our we not been asleep at the wheel.
ReplyDeleteThe Republic hardly redeemed itself. It ignored the uproar as it developed, and so shares the responsibility for what happened. It doesn't do much good to stand by while the legislation is being written, but then yell and scream after it passes and becomes law.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I've seen Gannett editorial teams are wishy washy everywhere. The editorial page at my site seems to do everything in its power to avoid controversy. Most editorials are more akin to news analysis than anything else. One more reason it's just not worth reading the paper anymore. I don't need to agree with an editorial writer, but I like him/her to actually have an opinion.
ReplyDeleteGiven their druthers, I suspect that many publishers would prefer their papers not editorialize at all -- or, at least, that they not endorse candidates. Ditto for news directors in TV, to the extent any still broadcast opinion segments.
ReplyDeleteI think it's time we make all editorial writers columnists. End the charade of newspapers telling readers what to do. End the use of unsigned editorials representing the "good of the community." Doesn't "this page (created by writers smarter and better informed than you) selects Orman Dithers to be our next mayor" sound a bit pompous to you? Shouldn't someone let the publishers, editors and opinion page people know that today's community conversations are taking place online? Shouldn't someone let those folks know that online took over while they and their corporate leaders were trying to decide if the internet was here to stay?
ReplyDeleteMost editorial pages I've seen lately have the same stilted, stiff, boring voice of yesteryear. Too many editorials are written to respectfully address all prespectives and players in contentious issues. Too many editorial writers liken themselves to high court jurists and too many editorial page editors slice the life out of their opinions so not to sound "strident" or "shrill." Strident and shrill are not good for business, you know.
If a newspaper absolutely must speak out "for the community good," as happened recently in Phoenix, have the publisher make the statement under his or her name and photo. Legendary John S. Knight didn't hide behind "this page," "the Bugle's editorial page" or "this institution staffed by people more learned, aware and intelligent than you."
10:17 -- I agree that we'd be better off just going with columnists. I disagree, however, that most editorials in today's papers sound the same as they did in years past. Quite the contrary. In the good ol' days some of the best papers wrote hard-hitting opinionated editorials that were fun to read. Today, as you say, most papers run politically correct garbage.
ReplyDeleteBut I'm certainly with you on your main point. Allow columnists to sound off and don't muzzle them. Look at how popular Rush Limbaugh is. I don't usually agree with him, but he can get me fired up. Whoever decided that opinion pieces shouldn't offend anyone doesn't understand what drives readership. And if you regain readership, the few advertisers you lose because they get pissed off won't even matter ... and in most cases they will probably come crawling back when their advertising dollars do nothing with less popular media.
I think this took some huevos. Please don't arrest me.
ReplyDeleteNow this is the commentary that hits the nail on the head.
ReplyDeletehttp://roguecolumnist.typepad.com/rogue_columnist/2010/05/roll-over-gene-pulliam.html