Ginny from the Blog

I love journalism. So I defend the craft as often as I can, particularly local journalism. As a former reporter for the Durham Herald-Sun, however, I’ve heard countless times that local media only focuses on crime stories in Durham. This, of course, isn’t entirely true.

Still, the Bull City doesn’t seem to get as much positive press as its Triangle siblings. That’s just an observation, of course. I’ve never charted out all the local media coverage. If someone wants to take the time to do that and share the results, I’d love to publish that on my blog.

Meanwhile, here’s a screenshot from today’s News & Observer’s Durham news section. This is probably why Durham residents feel cheated out of positive local coverage. There are six crime stories, and one story about a proposed bill that could help reduce crime:

By no means am I saying the media should ignore crime news. And I’m sure if you dig around on the N&O’s website you can find some happier Durham stories. But this caught my eye this morning and I had to share it with you all.

Do you think the local media provides well-rounded Durham coverage?

So what happens when two famous political analysts (one who’s conservative, the other a liberal) come together to talk about the presidential campaign in front of an audience filled with Tar Heels? You get some laughs, some claps and maybe a boo or two.

David Brooks (conservative columnist for the NYT) and E.J. Dionne Jr. (liberal columnist for the Washington Post) met on stage at UNC’s Memorial Hall Tuesday night to discuss the presidential campaign. For a political news junkie like myself, it was 90 minutes of heaven.

Brooks opened with a surefire technique to endear himself to a Tar Heel audience: Insult Duke. “You guys are just like Dookies, only less stuck up,” he said, garnering applause and cheers from the nearly-filled auditorium.

It’s easy to get hung up in the media’s horserace coverage of political campaigns. So it’s refreshing to hear two intelligent analysts with mostly diverging opinions discuss aspects of the McCain/Obama race that can’t be covered in a sound bite.

Interesting observations (I took notes so all quotes are within a word or two of accuracy):

On McCain picking Sarah Palin:

*Brooks (the conservative): At the end of four years Sen. Joe Biden will still be the right pick for Obama. But with regards to McCain choosing Palin: “To be honest, I don’t know. I frankly don’t know if she’s going to be good or not. I’ve never met her I don’t know the character of the woman.”

*Dionne (the liberal): “Sarah Palin is clearly the most qualified person ever chosen for vice president,” he said, resulting in laughter from the audience and then adding “your laughter is my point.” He takes issue with: the lack of media interviews the campaign has granted so far and that McCain only met her (once or twice) before choosing her. He also is concerned about her lack of foreign policy experience. He said liberals will make a big mistake, however, if they “make a culture war” out of her selection by touting her as a small town American who shoots guns.

On the role of the Internet and technology in the campaign:

Brooks complained that technology (namely the ability to record video with small cameras and the use of blogs) actually make campaigns less transparent. He recalled the days when journalists used to rub elbows with candidates and chat informally on the campaign buses.

But with every move being recorded these days he added: “The candidate can not afford to unwind and open up … It has had this perverse effect of making campaigns less transparent.”

He added that the Obama campaign is particularly bad about this.

Strengths of McCain/Obama:

Brooks said McCain’s strength is that he has “incredible moral intuition” while Obama has incredible perception. He offered this anecdote, which happened before Obama announced his candidacy for president:

Brooks (the conservative) wrote a column criticizing the Republicans for spending too much. To make himself feel better for critiquing the party he said he threw in a couple sentences that said Democrats were guilty of overspending too. The next day, Obama sent Brooks an e-mail saying something to the effect of: “That’s fine if you want to criticize the Democrats, but you know you just added those two sentences to make yourself feel better.” Talk about perceptive, Brooks said.

Anyway, back to connecting the Triangle. One of the perks of living in communities rich with univerisities is the opportunity to see distinguished speakers for free. Although such lectures are not always well-advertised off campus. So you may have to do a little homework.

Duke University recently launched this comprehensive calendar. Does anyone know of any simialr resources for the area’s other universities?

Starting next week, the front page of The News & Observer will feature a different kind of news on Mondays. Instead of printing what news has already occurred, the Monday editions of the N&O will take a “look ahead” approach, the newspaper reported today.

Starting June 30, Monday’s front page will focus more on what’s going to happen than what has happened. It will look at what’s coming in politics, government, business, sports and culture. In place of the news summary on the left side of the page will be a staff-written news forecast. Stories will be shorter, some holding to the front page.

Financial pressures have put a new emphasis on coverage that uses less space. The Monday A section, for instance, will lose two pages, including the Monday op-ed page.

The change appears to be among several cost-cutting efforts the newspaper announced last week. Those changes include laying off 70 employees, consolidating coverage with the Charlotte Observer and more. All the changes come weeks after the paper announced that subscription rates are increasing.

The N&O concluded its announcement with this sentiment:

But necessity can spur improvement. Next Monday, we hope you’ll agree.

At least the N&O is trying to be innovative in a time when some newspapers seem unwilling to confront and adapt to the changing media landscape.