Some industrious reporters at the Columbia Missourian have put together information and translation on 11 big issues in the presidential campaign. Check out what McCain and Obama really have planned for their presidencies.
Platforms of the Candidates
Friday, October 17, 2008
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Live Blogging & Fact Checking
Last night, while viewing our second presidential debate between Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, I participated in live blogging on the public life blog, called the Watchword. Six reporters on the public life beat participated from various places. I sat with about eight fellow students in a living room. I tried to keep their left-leaning comments from hindering my "unbiased" reporting.
While watching the debate on TV, I was using my laptop to blog, and had several tabs open to other websites for fact-checking. I usually pay attention to post-debate analysis by reporters and panels of undecided voters, but I have never focused on how truthful candidates were about the details.
The details can be quite important. They influence our opinions the moment we hear them even if we don't remember them. And over the course of last night's debate, I realized that often, whether consciously or not, candidates are tweaking the truth. Sometimes they miss the truth by a mile.
I'll cite examples from both candidates, but I think it's fair to cite more from John McCain, since he seemed to make more blunders.
Barack Obama indicated that 95% of everyone would receive tax cuts under his plan. Unfortunately, what he meant was 95% of "working families."
John McCain claimed he wanted to give "every American" a $5,000 refundable tax credit for health care. His plan would actually only provide a tax credit for $2,500; the $5,000 is for couples or families.
John McCain, while talking about eBay's retired chief executive Meg Whitman as a possible replacement for Henry Paulson, said that 1.3 million Americans make their living off of eBay. That number is actually a little over 700,000.
There are many more, and many different websites to help you figure out what is true and what is not. Some good ones I used: FactCheck.org, and Politifact.com
While watching the debate on TV, I was using my laptop to blog, and had several tabs open to other websites for fact-checking. I usually pay attention to post-debate analysis by reporters and panels of undecided voters, but I have never focused on how truthful candidates were about the details.
The details can be quite important. They influence our opinions the moment we hear them even if we don't remember them. And over the course of last night's debate, I realized that often, whether consciously or not, candidates are tweaking the truth. Sometimes they miss the truth by a mile.
I'll cite examples from both candidates, but I think it's fair to cite more from John McCain, since he seemed to make more blunders.
Barack Obama indicated that 95% of everyone would receive tax cuts under his plan. Unfortunately, what he meant was 95% of "working families."
John McCain claimed he wanted to give "every American" a $5,000 refundable tax credit for health care. His plan would actually only provide a tax credit for $2,500; the $5,000 is for couples or families.
John McCain, while talking about eBay's retired chief executive Meg Whitman as a possible replacement for Henry Paulson, said that 1.3 million Americans make their living off of eBay. That number is actually a little over 700,000.
There are many more, and many different websites to help you figure out what is true and what is not. Some good ones I used: FactCheck.org, and Politifact.com
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Representation - Why I Can't Sleep
The night before one of my stories will be published in the paper, I can't sleep. I lie there, awake, and my heart races and my mind spins its wheels. They spin in the fear that I have somehow misrepresented a person or an issue, and they can't get traction - I can't move on.
The burden of representing the truth is a burden I think many of us reporters often overlook. I suppose I'm thankful for the awareness I have about this responsibility, although I wish the weight of it wouldn't come down on me while I'm trying to sleep. I've tried to be anxious about stories earlier in the evening so I can get over it by bedtime, but so far that hasn't worked.
My latest story is a representation of an undecided voter, someone I've met with three times now for hours at a time. We discuss his political views (I keep mine to myself), we talk about what he watches and reads, and he tells me about his native country, Argentina.
One word: change. We think we need change. Let's keep in perspective that our politicians don't offer voters money for their votes, our police don't hold us up for our money, and we don't have a long history of complete corruption and international debt.
Throughout our conversations, I have come to have enormous respect for Miguel, someone who takes his responsibility, as a voter, to choose the best presidential candidate very seriously. He has no ingrained opinions about Democrats or Republicans, no family history in US politics to persuade him, no love or hatred for either party. He reads, listens, and weighs the issues according to what the candidates say about them.
In my story I am representing a complex individual with a rich history very different than my own, and I'm doing it in 6-8 inches.
So I can't sleep.
If you're reading this soon after I write it, the story will probably still be on the homepage of the Columbia Missourian. Otherwise, read here: Undecided Voters
The burden of representing the truth is a burden I think many of us reporters often overlook. I suppose I'm thankful for the awareness I have about this responsibility, although I wish the weight of it wouldn't come down on me while I'm trying to sleep. I've tried to be anxious about stories earlier in the evening so I can get over it by bedtime, but so far that hasn't worked.
My latest story is a representation of an undecided voter, someone I've met with three times now for hours at a time. We discuss his political views (I keep mine to myself), we talk about what he watches and reads, and he tells me about his native country, Argentina.
One word: change. We think we need change. Let's keep in perspective that our politicians don't offer voters money for their votes, our police don't hold us up for our money, and we don't have a long history of complete corruption and international debt.
Throughout our conversations, I have come to have enormous respect for Miguel, someone who takes his responsibility, as a voter, to choose the best presidential candidate very seriously. He has no ingrained opinions about Democrats or Republicans, no family history in US politics to persuade him, no love or hatred for either party. He reads, listens, and weighs the issues according to what the candidates say about them.
In my story I am representing a complex individual with a rich history very different than my own, and I'm doing it in 6-8 inches.
So I can't sleep.
If you're reading this soon after I write it, the story will probably still be on the homepage of the Columbia Missourian. Otherwise, read here: Undecided Voters
Saturday, September 27, 2008
First Presidential Debate
Did you know that this is the first presidential race since 1952 that neither candidate has held the office of president or vice-president? This may be why many voters still have big questions concerning John McCain and Barack Obama, according to Dr. Benoit, a communications professor I talked with on Thursday.
If you watched the debate last night, you may agree or disagree with some of the things being said by viewers and/or analysts:
--The candidates did a poor job of answering questions about the economy. They were vague and made comments that were politically safe.
What I have to say is, what did you expect? Neither candidate is going to say something provocative about the economy when so much is still uncertain. And economic policy cannot be distilled into a 2 minute answer, no matter how pithy or witty you are.
--Both campaigns can claim their candidate won because they played to their constituents and avoided making any major gaffs.
I think this is true. Whether any undecided voters felt the lights turn on after that debate I don't know, but both candidates seemed to play their part well, especially on foreign policy. McCain insisted that Obama had to accept that he was wrong about the surge of troops in Iraq and is wrong about how to win the war. Obama insisted that McCain has to stop thinking only about Iraq.
--McCain effectively pinned the label of "inexperienced" on Obama by consistently using the phrase "he doesn't understand" or something like it, and using examples of his experience in foreign policy and his travels around the world.
Well, maybe. Some might believe that this plan of attack did answer the big question of "Is Obama too inexperienced?" with a big fat YES. But others may not be inclined to lean towards McCain on this point, given what I'm about to say next...
--McCain seemed squirrely, unable to look at Obama or talk to him directly, and he seemed irritated and uncomfortable, while Obama talked directly to McCain, and seemed composed and presidential.
I'm inclined to agree with this assesment, political partisanship aside. There were several moments when McCain clearly looked uncomfortable. I don't know for what reason, but I generally thought Obama looked more composed. And looks can go a long long way in a presidential debate.
If you want to read more about expectations of this debate and a little history on presidential debates, check out my latest story: MU Professors Weigh in on Debate.
If you watched the debate last night, you may agree or disagree with some of the things being said by viewers and/or analysts:
--The candidates did a poor job of answering questions about the economy. They were vague and made comments that were politically safe.
What I have to say is, what did you expect? Neither candidate is going to say something provocative about the economy when so much is still uncertain. And economic policy cannot be distilled into a 2 minute answer, no matter how pithy or witty you are.
--Both campaigns can claim their candidate won because they played to their constituents and avoided making any major gaffs.
I think this is true. Whether any undecided voters felt the lights turn on after that debate I don't know, but both candidates seemed to play their part well, especially on foreign policy. McCain insisted that Obama had to accept that he was wrong about the surge of troops in Iraq and is wrong about how to win the war. Obama insisted that McCain has to stop thinking only about Iraq.
--McCain effectively pinned the label of "inexperienced" on Obama by consistently using the phrase "he doesn't understand" or something like it, and using examples of his experience in foreign policy and his travels around the world.
Well, maybe. Some might believe that this plan of attack did answer the big question of "Is Obama too inexperienced?" with a big fat YES. But others may not be inclined to lean towards McCain on this point, given what I'm about to say next...
--McCain seemed squirrely, unable to look at Obama or talk to him directly, and he seemed irritated and uncomfortable, while Obama talked directly to McCain, and seemed composed and presidential.
I'm inclined to agree with this assesment, political partisanship aside. There were several moments when McCain clearly looked uncomfortable. I don't know for what reason, but I generally thought Obama looked more composed. And looks can go a long long way in a presidential debate.
If you want to read more about expectations of this debate and a little history on presidential debates, check out my latest story: MU Professors Weigh in on Debate.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Follow-up Reporting
While it takes up the majority of my time, Reporting I is not my only class this semester. Nay, I have two more. One is a class in the Harry Truman School of Public Affairs, called Foundations of New Governance. Someday I'll get into what "new governance" is, but not now.
This morning I was reading a chapter in The Tools of Government on federal grant programs, and came across something interesting. Why are some grant programs ineffective and inefficient? Could it be because "Federal officials... know that they are much more likely to be judged by the intentions of a program than by its actual results" (Salamon 368)?
Are reporters dropping the ball by reporting heavily on the initiation of government programs, but not on the results of those programs? Do we need to do a better job of following-up?
Let me know what you think.
This has got me wondering if I am doing a good job of follow-up reporting. I think there will be some opportunities this fall for me to check up on new programs that I've reported on, especially those concerning city recycling.
This morning I was reading a chapter in The Tools of Government on federal grant programs, and came across something interesting. Why are some grant programs ineffective and inefficient? Could it be because "Federal officials... know that they are much more likely to be judged by the intentions of a program than by its actual results" (Salamon 368)?
Are reporters dropping the ball by reporting heavily on the initiation of government programs, but not on the results of those programs? Do we need to do a better job of following-up?
Let me know what you think.
This has got me wondering if I am doing a good job of follow-up reporting. I think there will be some opportunities this fall for me to check up on new programs that I've reported on, especially those concerning city recycling.
Friday, September 19, 2008
More Stories
I haven't been posting about all of the stories I've had published. Frankly, some of them aren't that interesting unless you are here in Columbia. But I'll post them anyway:
Security before Joe Biden town hall meeting: I covered Joe Biden last week on Sept 9 when he came to Columbia to do a town hall meeting.
Making a Living Off Recycling: this story was pretty interesting, and I blogged about it earlier (The Hard to Get Source) but forgot to post the story. The city council voted to make it illegal to pick up recycling from the curb.
Security before Joe Biden town hall meeting: I covered Joe Biden last week on Sept 9 when he came to Columbia to do a town hall meeting.
Making a Living Off Recycling: this story was pretty interesting, and I blogged about it earlier (The Hard to Get Source) but forgot to post the story. The city council voted to make it illegal to pick up recycling from the curb.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
What Do You Know
Some people argue that journalism is not a profession for several reasons, one being that journalism has no discreet body of knowledge like law, medicine, theology, etc. I've been thinking about this, and I'm not sure I have a good counter argument, but there is something here to say about what journalists know, or have to know.
Journalists must know, or be able to find out very quickly, about pretty much everything.
A guest professor told my reporting class yesterday about how on the third day after being assigned the "energy" beat at a paper in Oregon, there was a nuclear accident at a reactor in Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania. Turns out, there was a nuclear reactor built by the same people with the same design as Three Mile nearby in Oregon. She yelled to her editors to find her a nuclear physicist, got in her car and drove to the site, stopping for 10 minutes at a cafe on the way so she could meet with the nuclear physicist. By the time she reached the press conference at the site, she knew the nuclear plant inside and out, and knew the right questions to ask.
This weekend, as many of you may have noticed, there were some big happenings on Wall Street. By Monday afternoon I hadn't seen any local coverage by our paper or the competitor, so I asked to go after the story myself.
I talked to three stockbrokers yesterday afternoon and read more than I care to admit about the stock market, about the financial crisis, and about the big firms going down, like Lehman Brothers. Which, you might be interested to know, was founded in 1850. The 158-year old giant filed for "reorganization" bankruptcy on Monday.
Unfortunately my story didn't end up being an in-depth, comprehensive explanation of how the stock market works and how it affects Columbia, but you can read about what a few stockbrokers are telling their clients around here:
What Columbia's Stockbrokers Say About the Market
Speaking of going into the unknown: I'm also attaching a story that is not mine, but is definitely worth reading. It's a tragic story, and the two reporters who wrote it traveled way out of their comfort zone to talk to grieving family members and find out the whole story of a 21-year-old girl who died in a swollen creek in Columbia this weekend.
(It's a better read than the stockbroker story, I'm very willing to admit)
Man Trapped by Floodwaters Describes Ordeal
Journalists must know, or be able to find out very quickly, about pretty much everything.
A guest professor told my reporting class yesterday about how on the third day after being assigned the "energy" beat at a paper in Oregon, there was a nuclear accident at a reactor in Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania. Turns out, there was a nuclear reactor built by the same people with the same design as Three Mile nearby in Oregon. She yelled to her editors to find her a nuclear physicist, got in her car and drove to the site, stopping for 10 minutes at a cafe on the way so she could meet with the nuclear physicist. By the time she reached the press conference at the site, she knew the nuclear plant inside and out, and knew the right questions to ask.
This weekend, as many of you may have noticed, there were some big happenings on Wall Street. By Monday afternoon I hadn't seen any local coverage by our paper or the competitor, so I asked to go after the story myself.
I talked to three stockbrokers yesterday afternoon and read more than I care to admit about the stock market, about the financial crisis, and about the big firms going down, like Lehman Brothers. Which, you might be interested to know, was founded in 1850. The 158-year old giant filed for "reorganization" bankruptcy on Monday.
Unfortunately my story didn't end up being an in-depth, comprehensive explanation of how the stock market works and how it affects Columbia, but you can read about what a few stockbrokers are telling their clients around here:
What Columbia's Stockbrokers Say About the Market
Speaking of going into the unknown: I'm also attaching a story that is not mine, but is definitely worth reading. It's a tragic story, and the two reporters who wrote it traveled way out of their comfort zone to talk to grieving family members and find out the whole story of a 21-year-old girl who died in a swollen creek in Columbia this weekend.
(It's a better read than the stockbroker story, I'm very willing to admit)
Man Trapped by Floodwaters Describes Ordeal
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
