Chicago Tribune Cuts 80 Editorial Employees

The Chicago Tribune did what it does best on Friday, cutting 80 people from its newsroom, according to Chicago Business' Ann Saphir.

I truly feel for all 80 people. I am a graduate of a Tribune Co. buyout in the 1990s. It's not fun to be unemployed, especially after serving a top-notch news organization for years. But life will go on, and I wish everyone the best success in their future endeavors.

One note, a little sympathy from the brass wouldn't hurt. Here's what Tribune Chief Operating Officer Randy Michaels said in the Chicago Business article:

“We are not running a museum. We are running a business in a time of increased competition and economic hardship,” he says. “We should grieve for those who have been downsized. We should not be mourning the loss of anything else.”

Feel the warmth?

Slate's Rosen Uncovers Plagiarism at Texas Paper

Jody Rosen of Slate details in "Dude, You Stole My Article" how a free alternative weekly north of Houston repeatedly plagiarized his work and the work of many other journalists. What started as an examination of Rosen's story that was plagiarized by Mark Williams and published in the Bulletin, grew into an investigation that found dozens of examples of plagiarism since 2005.

The Houston Press interviewed the editor/publisher of the disgraced Bulletin, Mike Ladyman, who defended his paper:

“I wish the whole deal could have been handled more professionally. But I think honestly it wouldn’t have been a story if it was handled professionally,” Ladyman says. If he’d been given more evidence, the story about “the greatest case of plagiarism” (as it’s been labeled) might never have happened, he says.

“The mistake I made was not working fast enough for Jody Rosen and apparently I needed to be punished for it.”

What Ladyman doesn't understand was that to handle it professionally, he would had fired the writer, apologized to Rosen, and not blame him for reporting it out. Then come clean with his readers through a detailed report about the theft in his next issue.

In addition, the Houston Press published Mike Williams' "Open Letter to Jody Rosen", a rambling and incoherent justification of his actions, but quite possibly the only original piece of copy he has written in years.

There are many reasons why Americans mistrust the media. Some see bias, others feel reporters are pushing an agenda, and others just plain don't like us. But the No. 1 reason why journalists suffer a bad reputation is when we are labeled thieves. And make no mistake, whether it's a reporter at the most powerful paper in the world fabricating stories or a writer in a small-town paper creating "stories" mainly through a Google search, all journalists suffer.

Ladyman and Williams would be pitiful if they even deserved our pity. Their serial plagiarism reveal them as the lowest of the low in a noble profession. What makes matters worse is Williams' painful excuse of an apology, which some how tries to come to some kind of rational for his crime. For some reason, he was aghast that Rosen took the time to investigate and report the plagiarism. Obviously, hard journalistic work was something Williams is not familiar with.

In the end, Ladyman is shutting down the Montgomery County Bulletin. I say good riddance.

Update on the Philly Inquirer

Ryan Sholin on his web site has a follow up on the Philadelphia Inquirer's policy regarding when it posts stories on the web. He interviews Chris Krewson, executive editor for online news at the Inquirer.

Edwards Admits to Affair, ABC Reports

ABC News is reporting that former Sen. John Edwards, whose wife is suffering with cancer, is admitting to an affair.

The story reports that:

Edwards told ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff he did have an affair with 42-year old Rielle Hunter, but said that he did not love her.

Edwards also denied he was the father of Hunter's baby girl, Frances Quinn, although the one-time Democratic Presidential candidate said he has not taken a paternity test.

All of this comes after reports in the National Enquirer, which were for the better part of a year ignored by the mainstream media.

So much for becoming the attorney general.

Fox News Channel analyst Bernard Goldberg, while on "The O'Reilly Factor" this Monday, pointed out the hypocrisy of the mainstream media in its coverage of this story. In a response to a question from O'Reilly, he said:

Right. Okay, I did a little research when I learned you wanted to talk about this. In January of 2001, a newspaper broke a story that Jesse Jackson had a baby with a woman he worked with out of wedlock. Jesse Jackson is an important figure. He's a minister. It's obviously a legitimate story. Did the New York Times break that story? No. Washington Post? No. Either of the Chicago newspapers where Jesse Jackson lives and works? No. The National Enquirer broke that story. And when the New York Times finally decided to run it, they put it on page 21 under a one-column headline.

Compare that to a story with two unnamed sources that think that maybe that I'm not sure, but I think that John McCain was having an affair with a lobbyist. That winds up on page one of the New York Times.

Now let me give you one more hypothetical. That really happened. I know the New York Times would say it wasn't a sex story, it was a lobbyist story. Right. Here's a hypothetical. What if Newt Gingrich or our friend Karl Rove, who was just on, were involved with a woman on the West Coast and had a baby with her out of wedlock. Do you think the New York Times would be as squeamish as it is with the John Edwards story? I don't think so.

Goldberg is right, had this involved a conservative Republican, the New York Times would have been much more aggressive in its coverage. And that's the problem with the mainstream media these days. It does not play on an even field.

There are a number of reasons for this. It's not a matter of a vast conspiracy. In all my days in a major newsroom, I never once heard of an editor forcing his or hers political view into a story or coverage. But most reporters and editors look at news from the same prism. We all went to the same schools, we got into journalism to fight "the establishment." Journalism is not a highly trusted profession any more. We rank with used-car salesmen. In order to change that, we have to start leveling our coverage.

Oil Down, Dollar and Dow Up

Crude oil prices dropped below $116 today, and should settle at about $4 down today. This along with a stronger dollar sparked about a 300-point rise in the Dow today.

Here is the Associated Press story filed minutes ago. In it, a trading firm president predict $3.50 a gallon gas by Labor Day, which would be more than a 35-cent drop from today's national price of #3.83. The AP reports that a stronger dollar against the Euro was the main catalyst:

With the dollar launching a massive rebound against the euro and yen after the European Central Bank and the Bank of England both left their benchmark interest rates unchanged, energy traders found reason to sell — especially since the ECB indicated that there probably wouldn't be any more rate hikes to come.

Also, gold is down to $877 an ounce.

This all says something about the strength of the U.S. economy. A good day like this was surprising given Russia's military action in Georgia, pipeline problems in Turkey, and a larger than expected loss from mortgage-finance giant Fannie Mae. There may be a light at the end of the tunnel for the country's financial woes yet.

McCain Gains in Wisconsin

Rasmussen Reports released three new state polling results today in Wisconsin, Washington state and Massachusetts. In Wisconsin, the race has tighten up as Obama's 11-percentage point lead has dwindled to four. He is ahead of McCain 47 percent to 43 percent. Right now though, I doubt Packer management could get 43 percent.

Obama's lead in Washington has dropped to a 12-percentage point advantage. Rasmussen also reports that the race has "tighten up" in Massachusetts with Obama leading 51 percent to 36 percent. I don't think Democrats in Seattle and Boston are too concerned.

Rasmussen will also release polling from Missouri and Michigan at 3 p.m. today.

UPDATE: Rasmussen is reporting that McCain has basically held his seven percentage point lead in Missouri. In Michigan, the result is exactly the opposite with Obama continuing his seven percentage point lead.

Oh, by the way, Obama leads the useless national poll by one-percentage point for the 8th straight day, according to Rasmussen. Yes, the country is split.

The Web Is Your Friend

Yesterday, the Philadelphia Inquirer announced a new policy on posting on the web. Its internal memo, as reported by Romenesko, in part read:

Colleagues – Beginning today, we are adopting an Inquirer first policy for our signature investigative reporting, enterprise, trend stories, news features, and reviews of all sorts. What that means is that we won't post those stories online until they're in print. We'll cooperate with philly.com, as we do now, in preparing extensive online packages to accompany our enterprising work. But we'll make the decision to press the button on the online packages only when readers are able to pick up The Inquirer on their doorstep or on the newsstand.

If I read this right, not only will the Inquirer hold the story from its web site until the paper is published, but it will not post the story until the paper is delivered.

Papers with policies such as this often die. It is not 1995. Newspapers have to aggressively use the web to their advantage, not only in the editorial process, but in marketing and advertising. In order for news organizations (that is, newspapers) to grow in the 21st Century, they have to shed themselves from the ideal that the primary source of news today is the ink and paper product.

And, what does it mean when the memo says they "we'll co-operate with philly.com". Aren't they working for the same team?

This seems to be a short-sighted policy, and unfortunately, they are not alone in newspaper journalism.

Farve Trade Is the Biggest NY Sports Story of 2008 ... Almost

Living in eastern Pennsylvania, I often miss the New York sports scene, and the media frenzy anytime something good or bad happens. So when I need a fix, I turn to WFAN, point my car to the northeast, and hope that the atmospherics will help me get a signal.

This morning, I got to listen to Craig Carton. And in his usual excited style, he pronounced that this trade was the biggest sports story in New York this year. It went something like this...

"This is the biggest thing to happen in the New York sports scene this year. No. 2 would be Willie Randolph being fired. Yup, Farve trade No. 1, Willie Randolph No. 2. (Then a five second pause) Oh, looking back at the calendar.... Giants winning the Super Bowl is No. 1, Farve No. 2, Randolph No. 3."

As a member of the New York media for 25 years, I was always amused on our short memories. In New York, as elsewhere, it's the "now" that matter. I just got a chuckle at how a Super Bowl upset win just eight months ago is now ancient history.

By the way, I'm a Bills fan. This move by the Jets just made my fall Sundays a little tougher. I just have to hope the Bills secondary can pad their interception stats.

Surprise! Obama's Lead Isn't Big Enough



Sen. Barack Obama

 Politico.com is the latest news organization to pose the question: If Sen. Obama is so popular and the Republicans are not, why doesn't he have a huge lead?

It's rather simple actually, and David Paul Kuhn does a good job at explaining it. He points out that Obama's strength comes from three groups: the youth, African-Americans and Hispanics. Each of the three groups form a shaky coalition at best.

A couple things about polls. First and foremost, anytime you hear of Obama leading in a national poll keep this in mind: It just doesn't matter. It's not a national election. If anything, Democrats should have longer memories (Does 2000 ring a bell?) It's 51 individual elections on the same day. Heck, a candidate could win just 11 states by one vote and not even be on the ballot elsewhere and win the election.

And another thing, it's August. Most Americans are not focused in on the election. Lets see what the country thinks in late October.

Finally, with all these stories about Obama's lead not being big enough, is there a sense out there that some people in the media are disappointed or scared?