A Lousy Pretzel Shaped Sausage.

  I have been listening to some of the rhetoric coming from the talking heads on both the right and left side of the political spectrum. One of my biggest questions about the marketing of the various views being pushed on us is why does the Republican side of the aisle get their message out to the people so much more effectively then the Democratic?

  The democratic, or progressive, message seems to be more in line with the ethical and moral leanings of most of the people I know and interact with. Even the more militant conservatives understand that we need to take care of our own to make a safe and secure future for the our kids. 

However, the more conservative members of our society keep yelling that we need to do it their way, while the Progressives whine and mule about social injustice.

      Back when George Bush was The Decider and he accomplished something, he would get up on a podium and decry his victory, then others in his cabinet would do the same. The massage would be trumpeted all the way down the political line. Now that we have a Democrat in the Big Office, we do not hear anything even close to the same rhetoric from his side of the aisle. When a goal has been attained by the current administration, all we get is a subdued announcement from the left and then a cavalcade of criticism form the right, “He did not go in with enough force,” “he used too much force,” “the announcement was  made in the wrong room,” “I would have done it this way.” While the  Democrats just sit back and take the “high ground” acting too confidant to need to toot their own horn letting the positive message, and credit flounder away.

  When I was growing up, I was taught that we should not bellow and shout and boast. It was thought as egotistical. I have seen, as I get older, that the ones who get ahead let others know their outstanding deeds, or have others do it for them. The strength of the Republican party seems to be their ability to get the message out to the public. Though each person has a different set of words, they all get the message out there for the public to hear: “We are the right way to go, and we know how to do it!” doing it over and over until it just feels like the truth. While their message may be debatable, it is very powerful way to go about it!

  In our world of multiple multimedia sources of information and so many political, social and economic issues to follow, not to mention the world of sports, fashion, reality TV and just what is Kim doing today, the average person who is merely trying to get by and keep up with his or her family, the average dude or dudette may only hear the loudest, or most unique shout, the one that stands out. Remember when Representative Boehner was talking about his past and tears welled up? With his emotional out bursts so powerful, people listen to him because he has built a bond of sorts. What is more important though, is the way he did it. Inside of a month, Mr. Boehner was caught tearing up several times. Have you noticed that we have not seen him tear up for at least a couple of months. I conjecture that is because he made his point and has moved on. My point is not only did Mr. Boehner create an issue, but others touted it for him. If the media and other talking heads had not made such a big deal of it then there would not be such empathy for the man. He used others to make him into a sympathetic figure.

      When a democrat accomplishes something of significance it makes a splash and then, after a few days, no one seems to follow through. Nancy Pelocy, the Democratic minority leader in the House, does not do anything. we hear nothing from her, or her staff or the Democratic side of the aisle. Harry Reed --- well, I have heard even less from him. These are the leaders of the Democratic party, why are they not leading? because of this lack of leadership, the we do not get the coverage of, nor accolades to keep the momentum of positive accomplishments growing.

  Here is an example of what I am talking about. When Muammar Gaddafi was slain, the Republican party went ballistic. They praised the French and English for a job well done. They praised the local people for standing up for themselves. They gave a nod to our troops for a job well done. Was President Obama’s name mentioned? Yep it was, --- in a disparaging way. He did not do it right, or he did this wrong: that kind of thing.  John McCain, Senator from Arizona  even flip-flopped his opinion of the whole operation when the deed was done!

       
      Did we hear anything of substance for the left?---Uhhhh, Silence.

   
      This is only one instance of the failings in messaging that is being perpetrated by the democrats. It is true that Obama should not toot his own horn, BUT SOMEONE HAS TOO! OK so there is a Facebook presence and I get emails from the Administration, and I am sure there is some kind of Twitter feed for the President, but where is the media coverage? Why don’t the talking heads do more to carry the torch of their leader, Barack Obama? Why are we not hearing about the accomplishments of this Administrations? I listen to the radio all day long and I hear only from Stephanie Miller and Ed Schulz and Bill Press. Where are the politicians, the people who count, in this? They need to get in the fray and let their constituents know about the positive things they and the President have done. 

      Instead, they sit quietly by wondering why all the good work they have done gets overruled, or worse twisted in a lousy pretzel shaped sausage.

olc

Is Bugs Bunny a good dietetic planner?

She sits there watching TV after finishing her homework. The squeals and shouts of some show on Nick flashing across the screen, her eyes glazed over. Silence and then it starts again as a commercial for a sugary sweet breakfast food with a loud tiger yelling at us, “How GREAT!” his cereal is. Next is a cute baby giggling about something. Finally a fast-food chain comes up with a healthy alternative to their high sodium, fatty and sugary kid’s meal. Then back to loud frenetic hijinks of the show.


So what are we talking about here: TV causing short attention spans, or marketing and advertising poor quality foods to our kids? Both are relevant to parents. The government, led by our First Mamma Obama (hmm kinda like that) is trying to set up guide-lines for the packaging and marketing of food for our kids. Some say our government is trying to intrude its’ way into our kitchens and on our dining tables. They are concerned this is a gateway into controlling what we eat. Rep Fred Upton, republican from Michigan, said, "This appears to be a first step toward Uncle Sam planning our family meals." They forget however, that these recommendations are VOLUNTARY guide lines. Maybe a totally authoritarian government would try to do control our meal time---thus showing where his mind may be.


The commission, a Congressional panel consisting marketing experts from the CDC and FDA, US Department of Agriculture and the Federal Trade Commission personnel, made some fairly easy labeling standard recommendations for advertising to children. Among other things, the commission wanted to tone down on the use of iconic cartoon figures to attract youthful consumers. Of course this is assumes that parents let their children force them into buying what the kids want, and we all know that never happens. Right?


I propose something a little different (I am not the first, but it was hard to easily find available information supporting my idea). Instead of telling marketers they cannot use Tony the Tiger, or Toucan Sam or even Capt’n Crunch, let’s try using the fantastic strength of marketing and cartoon figures to educate and market to kids and parents healthy and sustainable eating habits? Some of the reluctance of major food producers to suspend the use of their animated idols is recognizability. We grew up watching and learning our eating habits from these icons. They might have done a better job---there seems like an epidemic of obesity and type II diabetes over taking our bodies. 


Yet we have an opportunity that should not be wasted. There seems to be a favorable environment for change, or maybe refinement is a better word. Instead of using all the market research and techniques gathered during the past years to sell not-so-healthy foods, why not use it to sell products that will feed us in a more nutritious and sustainable way? We have seen that advertising works and that using kid identifiable cartoons influence the desires of kids, thus forming habits used later in life. This way of advertising has worked to sell food items that are unhealthy, why not use the same method to influence our buying energy toward healthy foods? A governmental agency called Interagency Working Group asks the same question (www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141258532) 
Further, Herb Weisbaum, (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44878241/ns/business-consumer_news/#.TpX3hHPN5l1 ) from MCNBC, asked, “Why is the food industry so afraid of a little advise?” I wonder if there may be a profit motiv involved. Is it easier(read less expensive) to make foods with salt, sugar and high fat content?


This is the way I see it. Over the past 50 years, maybe longer, marketers and advertisers have developed data and strategies for marketing to kids crappy food. Now we can use the same force of data and information to start educating younger consumers and their parents healthy foods. Find cartoon icons that exhibit positive models of eating. Use the same screeching and excitement to get kids enthusiastic about apples. Make it look like a treat to have a pomegranate. Sour cream with that baked white potato, how about a pink cuddly character talking about the tastiness of a sweat potato with cheese on it, or a squirrel with its nose twitching having fun chasing green peas around plate and popping them into its mouth? 


I suggest we influence marketers and food purveyors to sell healthy foods with the same methods they used to sell sugary and unhealthy food. Instead of saying they cannot sell “bad” food to kids, encourage them to market more wholesome food. When we show a positive way of doing something, instead of saying, “NO!”, we make it easier, I hope, to change the paradigm and maybe influence the next generation to eat healthier foods.


What do you think? Am I making a sound point here? Let’s talk about it!


On another matter, I did some research on this post, but had difficulty finding information that supported my idea; positive advertising could be used in conjunction with the strategies used with a healthier diet. I used search terms like, “Food marketing for kids,” “packaging for kids” and other variants. All that come up were articles decrying the negatives involved with sugary foods. I was looking for information that supported my idea of using methods for pushing healthier food. Until I found this one article from webmd.com: http://www.webmd.com/parenting/news/20110307/cartoon-characters-influence-kids-food-choices, I came up with nothing. Any one out there have any tips for internet searches that can help pinpoint specific data? Let me know!!!


OLC

Simple Solutions to Difficult Problems

I keep hearing about theses one step solutions to very difficult situations both politic and economic. I am not versed in economics, I have no formal education in it, about the best I can say is I love to spend money---when I have it. Though I do not have any real formal background in Political Science, I do try to keep up with issues that are current. As an American Citizen, I feel I have a responsibility to keep informed. So why is it that I can understand the need to look at a very difficult problem from more than one point of view. There are so many examples of this limited point of view:

• The leader of Afghanistan saying that he needs to talk with Pakistan to make peace though out the region
• The republicans saying top down economic will solve all of our problems
• The democrats say bottom up will do it
• Israelis saying they don’t care what the Palestinians want
• Palestinians saying they need complete autonomy to have peace and freedom

Need I go on? There is the issue of climate change verses man made environmental manipulation. Does Greece have the ability to take down the world economy? Nukes in the former Soviet Union. Pollution in China---well let’s just make sure they stop driving! While we are talking about China, how about software piracy. I heard the other day that there are millions of unlicensed copies of Windows running around causing an epidemic of botnets.

After the politicians or media talking-heads have defined the problem, we the masses, are given a simple one step solution that is the magic panacea that cures all of our woes. Would that all, or even some, of the issues that complicate the easy flow of living, be solved so easily!

This brings a few of questions to mind. The first being can our issues be solved so easily? Well, Albert Einstein said, “It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer.” The modesty of the man is well known, however once again we see the profound wisdom he gave us. What can we take form his simple statement? One simple thing (sic): we need to consider more than one way to solve a problem. In other words, simply put :-0, look for more than a simple way of dealing with a challenge. In other words, elegant solutions to complicated dilemmas do not come in simple sound bites that make us feel better.

Another question that comes to mind goes something like this: Do the talking heads that control the flow of information really think that the info consumer is so simple as to really think that a one step solution to something like global warming is really feasible? This brings to mind two more questions. Is the solution really so simple? Or, do they think the populace is so simple? Both of those questions bother the hell out of me.

All issues, from seemingly simple things like what will the kids have for lunch at school, to issues of global importance like what will we be eating in fifty years and where will it come from, can be looked at from many different angles. Having said that, we need to understand that we live in an age where the average person wants to have everything made simple and easily digestible in 30 second sound bites. We want to understand a complicated problem while read doing one’s business in the restroom.

Simply put, we need to take more time to digest issues, understand them and finally realize that complicated issues cannot be unraveled in simple one step solutions. But more important than that, our information brokers need to stop dumbing down issues of the day and twisting them to their own agenda. 

Why are the People of the United States of America being insulted by our elected leaders, Part 1

I am not a blind follower of anything. I have a Mac Book as my main laptop, yet use the Sony for some accounting matters and I have an Android for my phone. I swore by Honda as the best motorcycle in the world until my last one cost me an internship, job and other hardships, including leaving me and my daughter stranded on a dangerous mountain road. My spiritual life is similar, there is no proof and we only have our feelings about the matter, oops the right word is faith. This way of thinking goes for my politics too---go figure. I lean to the left, though I do have some strongly conservative feelings.

I think that our President is the best person for the job dispute the constant harassment and down right belligerent attitude he has been dealing with on a daily basis. The choices for republican side a couple of years ago were very poor, though sexy. Economics is not my forte, but I do understand that to get this mess cleaned up the people, “masses” if you will, need to have money to buy things. It is very obvious that the “job creators” are indeed creating jobs. Unfortunately, those jobs are in other countries or, as in Rich Perry's case, are minimum wage jobs are and not sustainable. 

Of course the whole minimum wage debate is interesting too.

1. Get the slobs working
2. But don’t pay hem enough to live without government assistance 
3. Then call them lazy and good for nothing.

That is a topic for another time.

This post is about our President. I understand, to a limited degree, some of the obstacles he has had to hurtle, yet it seems that at very turn to get anything passed for the people, the bills get watered down to a faded reflection of the original intent. The President has capitulated and been walked over in so many ways it is insulting to the people of this great country. Some say that he is playing chess while others are playing checkers. The implication being there is so much going on behind the scenes and we just don’t know all the moves being made.  However what if the game really is checkers and not the more nuanced chess? Perhaps the game has been defined as checkers and President Obama is still playing chess. 

To continue the analogy further, the game of chess is thought out and never done from an emotional base, at least if the game is to be successful, while checkers is faster and less considered. This simile works even further, look at our recent past. One side throws out insults, jabs and slights and takes piece after piece, while the other considers and plans. One side bates the other, letting it collapse on itself.

This is a game of ego. Consider last weeks latest insult to the Office of the President. We all know it; the President wants to speak to Congress discussing the high unemployment rate. It is a routine matter to request time with the Congress and has NEVER been denied. The flimsy excuse given was that there was a debate going on for the Republican Presidential nominee (I did not hear about before this BS situation came along) and there were concerns about one side upstaging the other. We are talking about the Office of the President of the United States of America compared to someone who cannot get her history facts straight, a religious zealot, a political chameleon and some guy who is trying to create a political dynasty over the backs of the people he says he serves.

How many insults will it take before President Obama says that is enough? He has an incredibly important message to give the people of this country generally and Congress in particular and is getting bounced for a political reality show of NO real meaning.

Is it time to start considering another Democrat for President? Has President Obama been so thoroughly targeted as to become ineffectual? What is up with this battle of wills between Boehner and Obama? Could this brinksmanship be the downfall of our great nation?

These are some questions we need to look into and answer before we really do go over the edge of insanity.

OLC

The President goes on vacation and this is bad?

I know I am weighing on this issue a little late. It is true that others have pontificated on it, yet I feel compelled to say my piece. The President is on vacation. I say good for him! Having said that, I ask; does a sitting President ever really go on vacation? He has daily briefs, and needs to maintain abreast of so many issues, I wonder if work slow down is the correct word here. In addition, during this “vacation” he has dealt with Libya, the economy, a recalcitrant and vacationing Congress and basically just kept on going. I am not a golfer, yet I can understand how walking around and enjoying the beauty of Martha’s Vineyard can help clear one’s thinking. We do want to have a clear thinking President, right?

So what do you think. Let’s have a discussion.

olc

What is Going On Here are We Really Going Crazy

The whole debate about raising the debt ceiling has worn the whole nation down. I know from personal experience after the bill had been signed, I could not listen to any more about politics for a day or two. So I can really understand how our great and O so hard working Congress felt it needed to take a vacation. However, when one goes on vacation don’t we have to finish unfinished business, or at least delegate the responsibility to someone?

This whole issue with the FAA seems to be, at best pure neglect, and at worst a purposeful attempt at raising unemployment, thus undermining the confidence in various parts of our government. What seems even worse, at least to me, is the media has not picked up on it!

Am I missing something here? This is the way I see it:

• We are at a time of high unemployment already
• Our Congress neglects to deal with an issue that has to do with keeping 74,000 workers from their jobs
• The Congress goes on vacation

We are already at a time of high jobless rates. Our leaders make statements saying that job creation should be paramount to all of our thinking. One side is pointing at the other saying, “Where is your plan,” while the unemployed go hungry and loose their homes looking for work.

While those “nonessential” FAA workers, 4,000 direct employees and 70,000 contractors, are released due to lack of funding; our government is not collecting taxes generated from airline ticket sales (we will go into the corporate greed behind Deltas’ collection of the taxes in another essay). This dustup of Congressional proportion is over some credit that costed the government something like $16 million a year. Everyday this manufactured issue went on cost the FAA lost around $30 to $32 million a day in uncollected airline ticket sales. WTF is going on here?

So let me get it straight;

• 4,000 direct employees were out of a job.
• 70,000 contractors out of work.
• $32 million in taxes not collected.
• Because a $16 million a year tax credit flounders in a vacationing U.S House of Representatives.

These are the people we have elected to represent our interests?

I have two questions on this debacle in governing. The first is simple; Why didn’t the media bring this to our attention---kinda like when JLo gets a zit. It feels like the whole issue was pushed to the side and not given the attention it deserved. Now I know that we were all distracted by the very important issue, though artificially contrived, of the debt ceiling debate, but I think that the “masses” can hold more than one important subject at one time. 

What is more important though, is what were they thinking, these powerful leaders of the United States of America? Hypocrites may, or may not be the right term here. (could that be too strong a term?) While one side of the House kept trying to define the Debt Ceiling issue around jobs, whist at the same time ignoring the loss of 74,000 of them, I ask what is going on inside of their heads? 

Now is the time when I should conclude this blog with my statement concerning the culpability, or outright malice of our countries’ leaders and media, but I want to start a discussion among those who have read this. So please let me know what you think of my words and the questions I have brought up.


olc

Another of my postings on journalism: What makes a good Journalist Part 1

What makes a good journalist?

Above all else, a good journalist is ambitious and curious. Ambitious because the news does not happen at a predictable pace and the he needs to be ready to go out and get the story whenever and wherever it happens. There may be an assignment where the reporter needs to work well past the normal working hours and he needs to be willing and eager to go out and get the story. For example, a sporting event will take the aspiring journalist out on a weekend or for an evening adventure. Even though a newsworthy event may have occurred during the night, or even on the weekend, the normal working hours still need to be adhered to. Working late is no excuse for not getting the writing done. 

An aspiring journalist must be curious and observant. Whenever something of note happens, she must constantly be asking “What is it, who is doing it, why are they doing it, why is it important and how does it affect things?” It is the basic who, what, where, when, why and how that needs to be answered. So let’s start with the “Who.” Who is involved, who is effected, who are the principals, who is the victim or who is the perpetrator. What. What happened, was something broken what was it, what was the affect of the event, what caused it. Where. Where did it happen? When. When did it happen? Finally, How. How did the event occur, how will it change things, how has it effected those involved?

Research research research

What makes a good reporter, the ability to do fast and thorough research. Having said that, when a story is breaking a good journalist needs to be able to report the facts quickly and accurately. Alternatively, when given an assignment, say to report on a speech, she will need to do some research on the topic and speaker. She may even request a copy of the speech before hand so that much of the report can be written before hand. All the while bearing in mind that the speaker may modify his statements.

Elizabeth G. Cook, at the Salisbury Post, reported on Walter Cronkite’s words at an editors Conference in 2001. In her article, Cronkite still knows what makes a good journalist, Mr. Cronkite is quoted as saying, “...what makes a good journalist (ethics, principal) and what does not (good hair).” I imagine there was a bit of a laugh there, considering who was doing the talking.  These are attributes we have already discussed, but when disseminating information as an impartial reporter, we need to reek of these principals. If we are to create a trusting relationship with our readers, or viewers, or if we are in some kind of broadcast media, we must be consistent in our reporting and we must be fair.

Mr. Cronkite also said the there are (I’m paraphrasing here) three fundamentals of good news reporting: “Get it right; be fair and honest.” to put just a little more weight on his statement, Mr. Cronkite concluded with...if we do this “Democracy is fairly safe.” when I  first read the last, I snorted a little thinking Mr. Cronkite was exaggerating, but then it occurred to me that his statement was more profound than bombastic. Yes, our government does have its checks and balances, and yes for the most part our elected governmental representatives are honest people but the openness the a free press brings forth is essential to keeping Democracy functioning. 

What is News Part 2

We continue our discussion of What is News. Have a look at my earlier post.

The next definers (?) of What is News is Prominence, and Currency. A common event can be elevated to the level of news if a person or place of importance are involved. Take for example, the plane that crashed into a building in Florida, right after September 11th. There were two reasons that crash made national news. The first is obvious, but the second may not be so apparent. The building was the local headquarters for the IRS. 

The next reason why news is news can be attributed to is Oddity. As the saying goes, “If a dog bites a man, that is not news. But if a man bites a dog…” What this means is the extraordinary and unexpected are fun to follow. Of course what one consumer of news may find interesting and news worthy may not be interesting to another. So as reporters and journalists we need to find what is being watched by our audience. There may be an interesting event in a community that is of little actual value to the main audience, but they find it interesting. This can still be news. News does not have to be earth shattering, but it does need to have some value to the audience consuming it.

There are two main types of news.

The first is the hard news; the stuff at the beginning of a broadcast. Hard news includes the news of the day. It is controversial and has an impact on a wade swath of the audience. Slam!

On the other hand, softer news is more for entertainment, or background. It still has value, but the immediacy is not there. A tornado swarm that destroys whole neighborhoods is hard news, but a wedding in England. Aw, but is the wedding is of a royal family...this could be a feature story. Well, the royal wedding could be seen as hard news because of the prominence of the people involved. But it could also be seen as gossip---is the dress she wears really important to people not involved?

What would happen if a tragedy happened during the wedding in England, say there was a major fire at Buckminster Palace during the reception, now we have a story that is considered hard news? On the other hand what if the same tragedy happened at a wedding of a friend---nope not so much, at least on a national scale. Now we find ourselves in the gray area of each kind of news.

One of the most important goals a journalist must strive to accomplish is to provide the complete story, not just one side, or a slanted version that is weighted toward one side or the other. While public relations professionals have the interests of their companies or organizations and try to put a positive light on their information, a journalist has the responsibility to show all sides of the story, even if some are not positive. Bill Keller, of the New York Times said a primary responsibility of a journalist is, “Applying judgement to the information.” To me this means that though a reporter may report on a rumor or opinion he or she, cannot report it as fact. 

Objectivity and Fairness

“The term ‘objectivity’ was originally used to describe journalistic approach or “method”(from What is News, by Deborah Potter). As we discussed earlier, a journalist is human and has her own bias and outlook. As a journalist he needs to overcome these and report only the facts and not personal or corporate opinion. This is objectivity.

The story should be the giver of facts to a journalist and must she must be aware of her own biased thinking and find a way to over come it. Or better yet, she should report on subjects that do not affect her personally. The journalist needs to use a scientific and well balanced method of reporting that does not reflect on their of point of view. As journalists, we should be impartial and fair.

There are those in the media who say they are journalists, but in reality they are propagandists. They use only the facts that support their point of view and discount dissenting opinions. Balance to some means there are only 2 points of view. If only the world were that black and white. We also may think that all aspects of an issue are of equal importance. While all issues have important weight in an issue, we sometimes get bogged down with mute facts, ones that have been proven insignificant, or totally bogus to the issue at hand. The challenge to journalists is to find and report on viewpoints that have merit to an issue. The climate change issue comes to mind. There are those that say there is no climate change going on and not to worry about it anymore. But most reputable scientists agree there is indeed a shift in the climate of the world. There are two or more, ways this story can be reported on; (1) it is because of the affect of man, and the other, (2) these are cyclical changes that are not the fault of man. These are side issues, and another one may be what can we do about it.

So what do you think of how I have interpreted this part of the course. As I stated in the intro to the site, I want to have an open conversation concerning journalism. So speak up and let’s start talking!

OLC 

Citings

http://www.america.gov/st/freepress-english/2008/April/20080416211618eaifas0.8870203.htmlWhat Is News?
By Deborah Potter

Photos

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=767882438599&id=f79e8fcb8dc90959bcfb086ac5c83a75

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=763782438098&id=7e27c8ecbb84d2414710077eec8d4c81

What is News Part 1

What is news? It is a report of recent events; material reported in a newspaper or news cast. This part of the definition seems to consist of circular logic. The question being; is it news because it is being reported, or is it being reported because it is news? What ever the answer to that question, the information being reported on must be interesting to the general public and it must be of timely value. This means; is the news current and of value to the consumer. The information must not have been reported before, because once it is published it is no longer news, but history. Another statement that I found interesting is this, “An event may be newsworthy, but doesn’t become news until it is published.” I am not sire who said that. The statement seems to use the same circular logic as before. 

Just because a journalist is interested in an event does not make it news. So the question is; how do we define the news? One way to figure it out is if the readers are interested in the story, the more readers interested and the more intense their interest the greater the news value for the event, or person. It is kinda like the reporter/journalist is the gate keeper of information. 

The editor has a strong responsibility and requires these three things in a story:

1. Authenticity and Accuracy
2. Good taste
3. Mass appeal

Authenticity and Accuracy

The story must have facts from credible sources. If the facts are not accurate then the journalist would loose credibility, as would the paper or blog he is writing for. In the world of journalism, reputations are made with lots of work and sweat. While it can be ruined with one sloppy story.

Reporters ensure that what they write is meaningful and consistent and reflect the reality of the situation. The story a reporter writes should be interesting. It should collect the readers interest. It should also give information that has worth to the reader. When some one takes the time to read something and when they have to pay a subscription to read it, we have an obligation to write in a way that is going to enlighten and inform the reader and even entertain. So not only is the journalist a gate keeper, but an educator and entertainer. This is does not mean that journalists should write only to entertain, but he needs to write the story in such a way as to engage the reader. In doing this he needs to be consistent with the information in reflecting the facts of the story. When gathering information on an article the reporter will hear many different sides of the issue and he must wade through all of it and find the true facts and report on them. The journalist must find and report the reality of the situation. Though mistakes in research are common, they are not tolerated and MUST be fixed before publication. The reader demands and has the right to believe what he reads. The reader uses what he reads to make decisions that are important to him or her. It is the duty of a journalist to report accurately and without bias, so the reader can use the information well.

Good Taste

The reporter will avoid vulgarities and obscenities. The shock value of profanity is a given. However, a journalist must learn how to gather the attention of her audience in other ways besides being offensive. Some shock jocks may find their use of offensive language and vulgar repartee a way to get their audiences attention, but a good reporter has the use of language and simile to grab the attention of readers. I ask; do we always have to screem to be heard, or can the soft though strong and confident voice of a considered opinion make a more profound point. Neither a callous nor hardened voice is what we are looking for. Don't confuse gory details for objective reporting. As reporters, we report facts. Sensational or inflammatory language will get short term attention but is not the role of a journalist.

Mass Appeal

Be of worth to a significant segment of the audience. There are 10 elements to mass appeal which we will discuss later.

Timeliness

We spoke about this a little earlier, but news is perishable. It can be the most important thing to the greatest audience one minute, then of little interest the next. However a new twist or developing angle---some discloses, a scintillating fact---can revitalize interest and thus news worthiness of a story.

Prominence

Important people are more news worthy than others. The same holds true for places. Events hold true for this factor of news worthiness too. If a person is murdered in a back alley of a large city, the news may not even take notice. BUT! If a prominent politician is killed in the same alley… 

On the other hand, if there is a fire that decimates a small town library, it may be mentioned by a local or even regional news carrier, but little notice will be taken outside of the immediate area. However, if a fire takes the Library of Congress… The same holds true for a Little League baseball game compared to the World Series. To put it another way, while a person, place or event may be of importance to the local area, it may not be very important to others out side of the area.  

Let’s some up the idea of proximity with a short allegory from the recent news. The other day, in Afghanistan, some 900 inmates escaped from a facility. Yes, it made the news here, after all it is a pretty big event . What would the news coverage be like it the same thing happened at a supermax prison here in the USA, say there was a prison break during the rodeo at Angola? 

http://www.thegully.com/actions/journalism/what_is_news.html, The GULLY | Journalism Resources | What is News?

http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/special_initiatives/toolkit/news_industry/what_is_it_news.cfm, What is News?