Beats Me.

Ch. 14

The topic of 'Be Persistent' really consumed me in the text. I must have some undiagnosed social anxiety. I've written before that I just have an overwhelming problem with, basically in my mind, nagging sources for information. As I read on in the chapter about how beat writing is really built upon the fundamentals of source relationships.. it got me thinking.

I started thinking about why I chose to be in the journalism program to begin with. I enjoy writing, although news writing may not be my forte. Secondly I have this nagging conflict with 'the man' and the seemingly willingness of the exploitation of the American people. The people need to know.

So.. I am beginning to convince myself that persistence and meddling is necessary, in the name of the people. I should not wary of calling a political figure, in fear of burdening. My readers desire to know what is going on. I should be relentless until a source finally agrees to talk.

.. I need to remember to be persistent.

The chapter in a nutshell basically stresses doing your research and knowing your sources.

I was apprehensive while reading the section on the religious beat. I didn't feel like the paper should devote a page to religious news. But then as I continued reading I decided that the religion beat might be the most exciting. Personally, organized religion is as corrupt as any level of government.

Ch. 8 and ch. 9

"(Note that the Associated Press stylebook requires its reporters to use the word “innocent, rather than not guilty…to guard against the word ‘not’ being dropped inadvertently.”)"

I do not know how to strive for accuracy, when the news is not reflecting real life because of some poor editing or printing. The concept that the American legal system is designed around determining guilt rather than innocence should be expressed in the news. Who decides such exemptions from accuracy?

I have to admit I do not like pondering whether or not the legal system is democratic. I can vaguely understand why the media can be refused access to trials... and I can vaguely understand the press' right to report fully. Ultimately I am a pessimist and feel that someones rights must be jeopardized. If the legal system wasn't so shady, why leave the public in the dark.

If primetime television can produce so many hit crime-court series, court reporting must be interesting.

Court reporters should be allowed to freely analyze a court stories. More than words can express a defendants guilt. Courts are dramatic scenes, deserving of conservation of such dramatic elements.

Besides reporting on the actions taken place in court, post trial jury interviews seem to be the most exciting. I can imagine that it is difficult to gain interviews to some jurors, I would be scared of death threats if I was a juror for a high profile case. A group of the defendants peers labeled him guilty, that is an interesting story to understand from the personal level.

I feel that if reason for divorce is public information, settlement should be public as well. How can the press make sure the courts are working legally, if climax is withheld?

Hit Me With Your Best Shot

"Added Huckabee, warning of the coming entitlement crisis in Medicare and Social Security: "I just want to remind everybody when all the old hippies find out that they get free drugs, just wait until what that's going to cost out there."" - FOX REPUBLICAN DEBATE

Who says that? Who says that on national television? Who says that when running for president?

I stumbled upon the Republican debate Oct. 21 and decided to tune in. I've been putting off my candidate research and was pleasantly surprised to see Mr. Giuliani on my television screen. However once the candidates opened their mouths I was so embaressed for them I had to change the channel. I did not learn anything about what the candidates platforms are. All I heard was Hillary Clinton bashes. Huckabee's earlier statement makes me cringe even now. I can understand not being in favor of socialized health care.. however talk like an intelligent leader.. don't try and win the yokles votes by saying rubbish like that.

I salute McCain for a comment he made about Hillary supported the building of a Woodstock museum. McCain said he was to busy fight a war to know what was going on in Woodstock. Cheap topic to bring up.. but an A+ for handling the question and response.

My problem is that no one seems to be questioning the integrity of the party candidates. Stop bashing one another and tell me what you represent. Tell me what you believe. Let me decide!