Tag: media

Obama’s First 100

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

Today is day number 100 for the Obama Administration. This has been a benchmark of measurement for every administration since FDR. There will be lots of stories in the political media attempting to measure how he is doing as a president. This morning on NPR they perfectly captured the measure in only six words:

His backers give him high marks.

I add my own perspective as someone who is not sold on Obama but holds out hope that he will eventually do the best job he could do by focusing on those areas where he is right (things like real increased transparency in government). My position is largely unchanged from when Obama was elected and when he was sworn in.

If we simply add the fact that those who oppose him give him low marks we can easily see the correct answer to “how is Obama doing in his first 100 days?”

The answer is that 100 days is too soon to tell how Obama will fare over the course of 1461 days (or 2922 days for two terms). This is perfectly typical. We could not have known after 100 days what things Bush was going to do well and which things he was going to botch horribly over his two terms. The same can be said of Clinton or any of his predecessors.

So, Happy 100 Days Mr. President. May my greatest hopes for your tenure be realized or at least may we come closer to my greatest hopes than we come to my greatest fears.

Tags Bush, Clinton, history, media, NPR, Obama

culture

An Unlikely Headline

Public awaits First Dog news with bated breath declares the Houston Chronicle. I’m thinking that’s not accurate. At best its a gross exaggeration. The truth is that every day is a slow news day so there are reporters awaiting news of the First Dog with bated breath.

Maybe they should be reminded that if they are waiting for news like that with bated breath they no longer belong to the public.

Tags media

State

Newspaper Survival Tactics

Post author By David
Post date March 31, 2009
6 Comments on Newspaper Survival Tactics

Some people who read what I have written about news media might think that I would like to see the demise of newspapers – they would be wrong. I do think that news organizations generally need to make some adjustments to better serve their purpose (am am assuming a purpose of informing their audience). As I read a story in the Deseret News about their growth I saw two happy bits of information that illustrate the kinds of changes that can help the industry to survive. (I take no position on the Deseret News specifically, it is just the example at hand.)

The first is that it is possible for multiple publications to compete and survive.

Joe Cannon, now in his third year as editor, set out to make the newspaper and its Web site more appealing to Mormon readers. The effort already has made the paper’s Web site unusually active for a news organization its size, with 17 million page views a month. Visitors tend to linger, and half of them are from outside Utah, affirming Cannon’s strategy even as online advertising revenues remain marginal.

His aim is to reach out to "a very large Mormon diaspora across the country" that "puts us into a much larger pond," said Cannon, who was on the board of the Deseret News for a decade before taking over as editor. . .

Cannon said by making news coverage "more Mormon" he means appealing to a market niche larger than Utah instead of just a circulation territory.

This shift in focus at the Deseret News suggests a possible approach that would allows competing papers to coexist within the same market. In some ways it is not the same market because The Tribune is catering to the geographic region while the Deseret News is catering to the dominant culture of the region – even outside the immediate vicinity of the paper. The evidence of this is in the statement that "[t]he Salt Lake Tribune still is profitable, and together with the Deseret News is expected to remain on the short list of two-newspaper towns."

The second piece of good news is that "[s]mall newspapers are generally holding their own because of unique demographics." This seems to validate things I have read suggesting that the quality of papers were falling as they tried to put more emphasis on non-local coverage. To me this would suggest, for example, that the Provo Daily Herald should have it’s "your town" coverage of outlying cities such as Lehi and Eagle Mountain replaced by local papers – possibly with a joint operating agreement between the various Utah County papers. I’ll bet that the Herald and the new local paper(s) would be better able to serve the population of Utah County than the current setup. (Similar to my previous disclaimer -this is nota complaint against the Herald, but it should offer hope to any areas that feel underserved by it that there is an alternative path available.)

Tags Daily Herald, Deseret News, media, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake Tribune, Utah County

General

A False Dichotomy

I have never been a fan of Rush Limbaugh or Governor Huntsman which makes the false dichotomy presented here all the more ironic for me.

Rush Limbaugh told a recent gathering of conservatives that the party needed to return to its conservative roots to start winning again.

But Huntsman has been attracting national attention as a moderate, thanks to his support of climate change and civil unions and condemnation of his party’s lack of alternatives to the Democrat’s federal stimulus package.

"The poll shows a majority of Americans are in line with the governor’s belief that we need solution-oriented leaders," Huntsman spokeswoman Lisa Roskelley said, . . . "the governor feels it’s important to look at the party in a more inclusive way."

The suggestion that the Republican party must be more conservative or more inclusive perpetuates the myth of the single axis political grid. The truth is that Rush represents a certain brand of conservatism and pushing that single brand to be more prominent in the party is what makes the party less inclusive. Whatever disagreements I may have with my governor, Huntsman is absolutely right that we need to focus on finding solution oriented leaders in the GOP. That does not mean that we have to abandon our principles.

To be fair, it is the article and not necessarily the governor that is suggesting that a solution oriented approach is incompatible with an adherance to conservative principles.

Tags Deseret News, Jon Huntsman, media, parties, political figures, Republican

State technology

Predictable Responses

As newspaper Editorial Boards begin to write about SB 208 their positions mirror what I called the tip of the iceberg and what we expected on the day that SB 208 was announced. In fact, one might almost wonder in passing if the editorial in the Standard Examiner was written by the same person who wrote the editorial in the Deseret News. Both dismiss the idea that they oppose this because it cuts into the revenue they get from publishing legal notices and both suggest that a state run website would not treat all legal notices equally. Also, neither editorial mentioned that this website would help city governments and citizens to save money on all the legal notices that they are required to publish. Essentially all their objections boil down to scare tactics as shown by this response to the Standard Examiner editorial.

As I read the Deseret News version I had a thought about an amendment to the bill that would expose the sincerity of the newspapers in their "public service" claim for opposing this. If the bill were amended to stipulate that the legal notices website allow bulk uploads of legal notices from entities such as newspapers (at bulk rates), and also allow a feed or other source for newspapers to print or otherwise republish the notices from that site (if they so choose) then I can see no reason for newspapers to object – besides the revenue competition. If the papers really are not afraid of the competition – if they honestly believe they are opposing this on public service grounds – they should simply offer to post on the state website any legal notices they receive so that their service complies with the new law (assuming it passes).

The Deseret News also provided two claims that need to be debunked.

In addition, as any Web surfer can attest, Web sites are not dependable. They are subject to technical issues, and they don’t make a reliable and enduring archivable record the way newspapers do.

As a long-time web developer I can say that whatever temporary glitches a website may have does not change the fact that web sites can produce reliable and enduring archivable records. In fact, the most reliable archivable records of newspapers are digital. For proof of that simply go look at archive.org. I can pull up old websites of mine that I know no longer exist on any computer where I ever published them. Even if a government site went down it is not likely that it would be lost.

The bill claims it would cost the state nothing. However, Web sites require considerable maintenance and personnel. Even if this new site were to fall under existing state government Web services, it still would cost taxpayers. Newspapers, on the other hand, store and archive data for nothing other than the cost of a legal notice.

This statement completely ignores what was actually said when SB 208 was first unveiled. The site would not cost taxpayers anything not because Sen. Urquhart is ignoring the cost of running a site, but because the site would charge a nominal fee to cover the costs of the website.

I have nothing against the newspapers – sometimes they have useful information – but they have yet to show a solid reason why they deserve a captive market for legal notices. To prove that, I would encourage a removal of the cap on what they can charge for legal notices (this would be even more broad than what they are pushing for in SB 161) if SB 208 is passed.

Tags connections, Deseret News, laws, legislation, legislature, media, Steve Urquhart, Utah

life State technology

All is Well

It must be a really slow news day when the newspaper has to tell us something so basic as the fact that gays can’t get a marriage license in Utah. In other "news" the FEC would not allow me to run for President when I turned 18.

Recently I’ve been so busy that I am not really following anything more newsworthy than that anyway. I am working on a plugin that might interest politically active bloggers. I don’t normally talk about plugins on this blog, but I’ll post here when I have something that people can use.

Tags House 20, media, plugin

State technology

Legal Notice – SB 208

I was going to post a summary of the meeting, but many other people have already done a good job of that (Holly, JM Bell, Jason, Bob, Joe). So far, it appears that only JM Bell and BenJoe have taken the time to create something more than a back-of-the-napkin post of quotes and initial reactions. (That’s not a criticism of the other posts, by the way.) From the meeting itself I only want to post one little gem from Sen. Urquhart:

It’s not government’s job to prop up an industry.

I wish someone would tell that to Congress.

Now, my initial thoughts were that I can’t wait to see how the media reacts to this. The very tip of the iceberg comes in the form of a comment that has been posted on a couple of the blogs that wrote initial reactions.

The claim is that the newspapers are already developing a website that would serve a similar purpose of providing more access and wider distribution of legal notices. Personally, I won’t hold my breath. Even if their site is close to production I would have to see it before deciding if it really serves the public. There is no reason that citizens should be mandated to publish through the newspapers – just as there would be no justification for mandating that they could not publish through the newspapers.

If newspapers are pushing to raise the cap on what they can charge for legal notices I have a hard time imagining that they are planning to offer the services of their new website for free or even at a low cost.

I think the heart of the comment is in this paragraph:

As has been the case for centuries, public notice is best served by a third-party, independent source. There should be a be check and balance on government power. In other words, should the fox be watching the henhouse when it comes to legal notices? Also, should the government be in the business of creating its own communications bureaucracy?

I think we need to define who the parties are to this system. The government has nothing to gain by not publishing some legal notice that has been submitted so I’m not sure that you could claim that they are any less independent than the newspapers. I don’t believe that publishing legal notices gives any power to the press. The whole statement sounds like a breathless rush to throw out something that might make people reject this proposal without any real argument against it.

A more thoughtful question was posed during the briefing (I believe by Ethan Millard):

Why should government take over a market that has been a private transaction?

My answer has two parts. First – is it really a private transaction when government has already mandated that the transaction take place? Second – I would not argue that government should take over such transactions, only that there is very little reason why government should avoid making the legal requirement that drives those transactions as painless as possible. If there were already some low-cost way for people to meet the requirements of providing legal notice that provided the requisite distribution of the notice then there would be no reason for this bill.

The fact is that government should not be mandating a captive market, as the legal notice requirement currently does. Newspapers have become dependent on their captive market – that’s not healthy for them and they need to fix it even if SB 208 were not being proposed. Let’s free people to allow publishing of legal notice outside the newspapers and then eliminate the cap on what newspapers can charge for the notice when people choose to publish through the papers.

Tags blogger briefing, connections, laws, legislation, legislature, media, Steve Urquhart, Utah

State technology

A Blogger Press Corps – of Sorts

Post author By David
Post date February 10, 2009
5 Comments on A Blogger Press Corps – of Sorts

I was just talking to Ric Cantrell about the Bloggerpresser that is taking place this afternoon at 4:00 in the senate building (it’s an open invitation – see his post for details on attending live or virtually). I want to share a couple of interesting thoughts from our conversation.

Ric mentioned as he has tried to organize this event that bloggers are not like the traditional press corps. (Not that he expected they would be.) With a standard press conference he can simply email the reporters who cover politics at the various news organizations and know that the conference will be covered. With bloggers there is no definitive list of who is interested or available. He can send an email to those whose emails addresses he has, but that does not guarantee that everyone who would like to come has been informed. There is no central place where anyone can be assured that all the appropriate bloggers will get the information.

That makes me wonder – what would be the best way to deal with this issue? Is it something where political bloggers who wish to cover state legislative issues should be expected to follow senatesite.com to get announcements when they do blogger oriented events? Would it be better to have a Utah Bloggers Pseudo Press Corps email list that interested bloggers could subscribe to for such announcements? (I made that name up as I typed it, don’t hold me to that name if you favor the email list idea.)

Another question I have is – who is interested in the idea of press credentials for bloggers? Who is interested in a non-credentialed Blogger Press Corps? Please let me know if you have interest in this area so that we can expand the group of people who are discussing the possibilities.

Tags blogging, connections, legislature, media, Press Bloggers

National

Define “Change”

I have come to the conclusion that I should not listen to national news – it just gets me agitated.

I was driving home listening to NPR and was treated to actual soundbites from the rallying speech that President Obama gave to the Democratic caucus meeting. I had head about that, but hearing these gems really showed that many people must mistake the fact that Obama is articulate by assuming that everything he says must therefore be intelligent and accurate.

The audio clips I heard had the president emphasizing that the people elected him (and the rest of Congress) to change the direction of the country and were not seeking "more of the same." What really got to me was this well phrased analogy:

"I don’t care whether you are driving an SUV or a hybrid, if you are headed toward a cliff you have to change direction."

He’s absolutely right. My reaction was that instead of changing direction when faced with an economic cliff, the president and Congress are accelerating and hoping to grow wings by the time they reach the edge. Let’s examine the "change" that he is promoting.

The president calls inaction irresponsible – it seems to me that inaction is not something that the Bush administration can ever be accused of. In other words inaction would probably be the clearest for of change. Last year the administration got a $150 Billion dollar stimulus bill and later received another $700 Billion to unfreeze the credit markets. That’s $850 Billion in spending last year of money that we don’t have and the result is that we are still in a recession with no end in sight. The change that Obama is promoting is something on the order of $800 Billion in new spending of money that we don’t have. I’m beginning to think the politicians really don’t know the difference between legal tender and monopoly money (too bad the IRS knows the difference all too well).

President Bush and his Republican Congress raised deficit spending to an art form. When Bush got a Democratic Congress there was no change in habits. Now President Obama and his Democratic Congress are trying to build an art acadamy around Bush’s art form – that’s not the change I was looking for.

I understand that the argument Obama is trying to make is that the country is sick and honestly needs surgury. That is an argument that I can accept. The problem is that we have already tried surgury by hatchet – it doesn’t work very well. Our Republican senators are trying to insist on using a scalpel for the surgery. Their profligate economic past opens them up to accusations of hypocrisy – and many of them might very well be acting in full hypocrisy. Regarless of how hypocritical they are being the fact is that surgury with a scalpel is safer and more likely to not kill the patient. This leads to another inconvenient truth. Assuming that the patient survives surgury (whether by hatchet or by scalpel) to get a liver transplant we need to recognize that the disease was not a bad liver, it was alcoholism. Just because you have had a transplant does not mean that it’s safe to go back to the bar.

Tags bailout, Bush, economics, legislation, media, money, Obama

culture National technology

D-TV Switch

That would be D as in "Delay " not D as in digital.

I have had the opportunity to drive to work for the last couple of days and have been listening to the radio as they discussed this issue. I used to wonder why television stations should be forced to switch to digital signals. Now I recognize that Congress has been holding them back from switching to digital signals exclusively. That leaves me with the question of why it is so important that everybody be able to receive a television signal.

I know I’m odd in the fact that I never watch television (since the middle of 2000), but I really don’t understand why television stations should be forced to serve people through analog. Some will argue that television is an important news source. I argue that the "news" that comes on television is somewhere between uninformative and misinformative most of the time. Some will argue that the entertainment is important. Though I find little television entertainment worth watching (yes, I still do have a vague idea of what’s offered), none of it is necessary and why should Congress be involved in mandating our entertainment options? (I can’t seem to find that section in my pocket Constitution.) Next thing you know, Uncle Sam will be giving away 5 free movie tickets per person per year – like they do in New Zealand (I may be wrong on the exact quantity).

Considering what I heard about how much cheaper it is for stations to broadcast in digital I would bet that, if left to themselves, the television broadcasters would figure out a way to offer the financial incentive necessary to get their customers to switch to digital. But that would be a free market and <sarcasm>we wouldn’t want to try that – free market’s aren’t stable.</sarcasm>

Tags change, change congress, free markets, laws, media, television