I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
This article made me think, "Who on MGoBlog has press credentials?"
My belief was that Brian had to have credentials to be at the press conferences. But is this the case?
Anyway this quote from the article linked above is what I thought was the interesting item. And mark of the recognition of the new media channel the internet has become.
"Longtime civil rights lawyer Norman Siegel, who represented the journalists who sued, says the city will now decide who a journalist is by looking at the type of work they do, and not the organization they write for. "This addresses one of the major issues with regard to a online journalists," he says. "Bloggers should be treated equally to television, print and radio journalists." "
When I think of old media, like the Freep trying to enter the new media channel, it reminds me of how Radio Shock Jocks became all the rage. Essentially reasonable people had stopped listening to radio, and the only way to grab an audience was to become completely irrational on an issue, and then open the phone lines to all the irrational response.
For me today, radio is noise to be avoided. And print media is what I use to start my charcoal grill.
No wonder the flat panel Display Manufacturers are making it so easy to connect your computer, or WiFi to what you used to call your TV.
Alright, this is my only and final word on the subject of the NCAA press conference.
Here is what happened today:
1) The school announced what the NCAA had told them about what it believes the school did wrong.
2) Rational media heads explained that what was in the report was neither bad nor uncommon, but did indeed violate some of the rules. They predicted minor sanctions.
3) Non rational media heads explained what they believed was true regardless of what was in the report (I.E. - "They Cheated!"), and predicted a good old fashioned program drawing and quartering.
4) Non-media members who enjoy attention felt compelled to chip in, saying whatever they could to ensure they get a sound bite.
5) The school announced that its report on what it intends to do to fix the problems and discipline itself is due in 90 days, at which point the NCAA will rule on whether that's enough or not.
These changes and disciplines will include things like (fix paperwork issues, review and update job descriptions, add compliance personnel, replace certain staff members, and reduce scholarships by one for one year.
That's it. That's all you need to know. Any media member predicting otherwise, taking someone to task in print or on air, etcetera, is just stroking their own ego. They can't do anything about it. The NCAA isn't going to be influenced by the Drew Sharpe's of the world. The stadium isn't going to be only half full next year. And we're not going to fire our coach so long as he wins.
SO just relax, and ignore it.
Many of the posts here have suggested that a certain unnamed newspaper in a big city near Ann Arbor has a media bias. If you want to learn more about the topic of media bias—how to investigate it and what to do about it---you might want to start by checking out the interesting summary and references on the topic of media bias in the link below. In fact, it raises some interesting questions if anyone wants to investigate the investigators—ie the unnamed newspaper which makes money trying to expose the frail underbelly of defenseless adolescents and their schools.
First, to determine whether or not there is a hidden agenda of writers or editors, look at their personal and business contacts, sociodemographics, attitudes, past professional connections, payments to speak or write (eg Do they ever get gigs through the influence of people with an axe to grind or those who would directly benefit from harm to a particular school’s program?). Also, look at quotes that reveal their beliefs, the frequencies of positive or negative word use or topic or headline choice for one school vs. another. Look at the paper's selective use or exclusion of experts, spokespersons, sources (eg interviewing a police officer for a player in a unfavored school but the father of a student in a more favored competitor).
Second, to determine if the larger organization fosters a bias, ask: What are the business interests of the paper (eg advertisers)? Could they be motivating a bias? Are any of the advertisers actually boosters at competing schools? Also, how about the paper’s ownership? (Hypothetically, for instance, if you were to look at two randomly chosen papers, like the Freep and the now defunct AnnArbor News, you would find they're owned by a mega-corporation called Newhouse News).
Why is that relevant? Maybe I'm naive but I can't really disprove the academic quote from the link below. It says “reporters and especially editors share and/or acquire values with corporate elites in order to further their careers. Those that don’t are usually weeded out or marginalized.” If so, one might conclude that one of the largest media groups in the country, with outlets all over the nation, like Newhouse, could have enough clout to--not necessarily even get you on TV, get you cited in national sources, or get you a news job in the future—but in fact, decide whether or not your paper folds (and I don’t mean putting a crease in your newspaper).
What to do about media bias
First, publicly disclose affiliations “when a news organization is reporting a story with some relevancy to the news organization itself or to its ownership individuals or conglomerate.” Do a paper’s sponsors have interests that conflict with sponsors of the school they attack? “Often this disclosure is mandated by the laws or regulations pertaining to stocks and securities”
Also, publicly disclose which owners of media outlets have vested interests in other commercial enterprises or organizations…Note whether any of them are boosters of athletic departments at competing schools....Do they have commercial ties to university officials or members of the Board of Directors at these schools?
If justified, demand the resignation or reassignment of biased reporters and or editors….possibly petitions or letters from prominent journalists, organizations etc…even referrals to the attorney general in the unlikely event that there are possible violations related to stocks or securities.
Finally (and probably the most effective measure), put pressure on the paper’s financial ties. I know, it may seem overwhelming if you are up against a large publication or even a mega-corporation. However the link notes: There is “a long history of advertisers pulling out support when media content becomes too controversial.”
Of course, I am not suggesting any of these actions…or even asserting that a media bias does exist at all, let alone in the state of Michigan…Horrors, no....But, I can’t help thinking about its hypothetical relevance to UM.
Doesn’t UM have the largest alumni base in the country? If they were (hypothetically) the victim of biased coverage, how long would they keep being fed what any clearly hostile media sources are serving?
In fact, doesn’t UM now even have a politically savvy, well-connected AD with commercial ties all over the world due to his past role as a CEO of a major corporation?
What would happen then if the new AD were to learn about the presence and sources of bias, if the advertiser’s associations with biased media started gaining publicity, even starting on widely read blogs like this?
If I were an advertiser for such as source, making a lot of dough by indirectly paying hacks to trash a school,.....well,
I’d thank my lucky stars if the alums, AD, and other prominent people couldn’t get mad enough to stand up and fight back....
Privately, though, I’d be shaking in my hypothetical boots.
What impression would the headline about David Brandon's hiring on the front page of the Detroit Free Press's website have you believe?
New U-M AD Brandon doesn’t fear NCAA probe
Except, well, no.
That headline links through to the Freep's normal story, which is a straight story about Brandon's hiring.
Take it from a journalist (I am one): The story should absolutely make reference to the NCAA probe Brandon is inheriting. It'd be irresponsible to exclude it. As the story itself is written, it gets three grafs in the middle of the story, which is appropriate.
But what's deceptive is the headline the Freep is slapping on its front-page story (which is far different from its hed within the story, the far less charged: "University of Michigan officially selects David Brandon as athletic director).
Look, this practice happens all the time. Editors want to sex up and sell stories on their front page. There isn't anything wrong with it, per se.
HOWEVA, the choice for this, frankly, biased headline on the front page shows a conscious decisions by the Free Press's editors to a) frame the story as squarely part of their own, b.s. story on the practice "violations"; and b) keep the NCAA storyline alive by virtue of their own choice for the external headline.
The fact is that the NCAA component of Brandon's hiring is, by far and away, not the most salient takeaway from Brandon's hiring. Whatever that takeaway should be must be their main site's headline. Anything short of that ranges between irresponsibility and shoddy work by the Freep's editors.
The Citrus Bowl is on ESPN Classic right now, I was pumped when I saw it flipping.
TBS just came back from commercial showing their highlights of the game with the music from Dave Matthews Band.
It's bad enough that ESPN/ABC has done it. But now this horrid idea is being copied?
Why do producers feel to put their highlights to music that neither is inspiring or interesting.*
*No offense to DMB fans out there, but they had their time and that time was 1996.