Lou Grant Episode 1

Watching Lou Grant, I find it to be very interesting. I almost wish that I were alive during that time to do journalism that way.  I like the old-school way of things, how everything is print, the journalists are so committed, and the inside sources.

Watching it, I learned about how much controversy journalists actually have to uncover. I had no idea how much digging journalists really had to do and how much time they really had to put into their articles. It's almost as if they don't have time for a social life because the new and world never stops for you.

Good leads vs. Bad ones

BAD

"SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea claimed on Tuesday to have missiles that can reach the American mainland, and it said that the recent agreement between Washington and the South Korean government to extend the range of South Korean ballistic missiles was increasing the risk of war on the Korean Peninsula." 

• The New York Times published this article today, and immediately the lead got my attention, but that was only because I am afraid of North Korean missiles.  I feel that there is too much information in the lead, or the sentence is too much of a run on.  It is a very wordy lead, as picky as that makes me sound, and Korea is said so many times I forgot which one I was supposed to be afraid of.

"ROSWELL, N.M. (AP) — Plans for extreme athlete and skydiver Felix Baumgartner to make a death-defying, 23-mile free fall into the southeastern New Mexico desert were on hold Tuesday morning due to winds, but his team was still hoping the weather would clear after sunrise in time to make the jump."

• I can't figure out what it is about this lead that I don't like.  It might be that there is too much information.  I think that they could have put "but his team was still hoping the weather would clear after sunrise in time to make the jump." in the second paragraph considering it is not vital information to the reader.

"On the occasion of being named the Sexiest Woman Alive by Esquire Magazine, Mila Kunis reiterated her pro-Obama, anti-GOP views."

• Putting all of my love for Mila Kunis aside, (I clicked on the article for her), I hate the lead. It doesn't tell me enough. It doesn't tell me specifics. It's very bland. I wish it said what she was so opposed to, what kind of view. As an uninformed citizen I don't even know what an anti-GOP view is.

GOOD

"About 13,000 people may have been exposed to the tainted steroid that has been linked to a growing outbreak of fungal meningitis, a spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on Monday. The outbreak has killed 8 people and sickened 97 others in 23 states. More cases are expected."

• The New York Times published this article on October 8th.  I think that this is a really good example of a good lead.  It gives hard numbers which readers like, it tells you the who, what, when, where and why and it gives the reader a reason to keep reading.

"BELLEFONTE, Pa. — Jerry Sandusky has been sentenced to at least 30 years in prison in the child sexual abuse scandal that brought shame to Penn State and led to coach Joe Paterno's downfall."

• The Record, a North Jersey newspaper that I just so happen to be addicted to, published this article about Jerry Sandusky.  I love this lead because the reader doesn't even have to go any further with the reading... I didn't. I know all that I need to know with this lead and (happily) exited out of the article.

"(Reuters) - The U.S. government filed a civil mortgage fraud lawsuit on Tuesday against Wells Fargo & Co, the latest legal volley against big banks for their lending during the housing boom." 

• I like this lead. It's straight forward and tells me exactly what they are going to talk about.  It gives you the 5 W's, just the way it should and is extremely concise.

UMass Hinders First Amendment Right

FIRE- Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, called out UMass as being one of the worst Universities for the policies put into place hindering students First Amendment Rights.

UMass has put policies on rallies that FIRE thinks to be absurd.  The first aspect of the policy is that students need to plan rallies 24 hours in advance.  FIRE feels that this limits the students to be able to react to the current world. 

Personally I do not know if I fully agree with FIRE on that because I know that the University is looking out for the students best interest. Yes, it does alter the students reaction time, but the University just wants to be able to have security there to keep from something absolutely tragic happening.

FIRE has a problem with UMass' definition of rallies- "events where people freely assemble around a common cause(s) and/or point(s) of advocacy." Obviously UMass made the definition so broad because of the many cases where they may have to defend themselves against rallies.  As a UMass student, I see both sides as to why the school would need to restrict the rallies, especially after seeing the rally videos post-superbowl. 

I do agree with the fact that UMass cannot restrict the students to where they protest or rally.  Only giving the Student Union steps to the students during a certain number of hours is not enough.  The steps are large, but they aren't that large.. With over 20,000 students, where do you expect all of them to stand. What if the majority of the school actually wants to participate in a specific rally? That is just making the steps an extremely dangerous place for the UMass students, isn't it?

So... Burning an American flag is ok?

In the Supreme Court Case of Texas v. Johnson, I couldn't imagine ruling in favor of Johnson. Johnson had burned a flag in protest of the Reagan administration policies. If Americans begin to disrespect the symbol of our country and our freedom, how will other countries, especially our enemies view us?

I personally feel that if you want to live in America, and exercise the rights that you have, you should have more respect for your country.  Burning an American flag is an enormous slap in the face to the countless people who died fighting for the right that you are abusing. It is one thing to exercise the freedom of speech and it is another to abuse.

Knowing the amount of lives that were taken in order for you to be able to burn a flag, you should at least have the decency to not burn the symbol of them.  People to this day are dying in order to protect the rights that you feel so privileged to.

Clearly I have an extremely biased opinion to this topic, and in my class discussion others were removing themselves emotionally and looking at it as a right to petition.  For some reason, I just cannot remove my feelings from this, and feel that the law should have favored with Texas.

Obama's Address to United Nations

Without having heard the 30 minutes speech, I read the New York Times article about it. I find that they hold a lot of respect for "Mr. Romney" and most of the article circled around him and his values rather than the actual substance of Obama's speech.

Honestly, I haven't formed an opinion on who I am going to vote for in the election, and seeing as it is my first, I feel like I should make an educated decision. So, what I previously wrote may come off as me being biased and leaning more towards President Obama, but I am really just trying to understand Mitt Romney and his beliefs.

Sometimes I find President Obama to be stating the obvious, something that every American knows like when he said Americans, “have fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their view.” I personally think that having a 3rd grade level education makes you fully aware of that fact. 

Knowing that the New York Times is more conservative than other newspaper companies, I notice how they bring up how often President Obama faces challenges and critique. However, when I read the way that they quote President Obama, I can hear Obama's booming voice speaking those words with the applause that most definitely came immediately after that.

Lastly, referring to my previous post, on the unrest in Libya, I have finally heard an official response from President Obama. “There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents, there is no video that justifies an attack on an embassy. There is no slander that provides an excuse for people to burn a restaurant in Lebanon, or destroy a school in Tunis, or cause death and destruction in Pakistan.”

I completely agree with the fact that there is no excuse for what the terrorists have done to our people overseas recently, but I would like to know President Obama's plan for seeking justice on those who killed Chris Stevens and our many other fallen Marines.

More Unrest on Twitter Than in Libya?

The unrest in Libya and the Middle East is unsettling on many different levels. It's frightening knowing that the United States will most likely be forced to send many troops over to the unstable area because of the recent attacks against our already existing troops. The photographs that are constantly being covered over twitter are graphic yet brutally honest and display how unsettling the unrest is in the Middle East.

As I read tweets about the unrest, my feed requires constant updating from all of the talk about the subject.  The most re-tweeted tweet is about pictures of people of the Muslim community apologizing for the deaths of the US ambassador and our Marines. As an American, I enjoy these pictures because as angry as our country can be we must know that not all of the Muslim community are terrorists, or evil, but are loving individuals.

However there are also many hate filled tweets from the angry and hurt Americans that can be deemed offensive. Videos of the attack of Chris Stevens have surfaced, and can be very confusing to some Americans.  It looks as though Stevens is being attacked and dragged however with recent investigation it is now known that the people in the video were celebrating the fact that Stevens was still alive and trying to get him help.

Now having an even deeper respect for the USMC, taking into consideration that a very close family member just became a Marine, I personally am fearful of what is to come but I have hope that justice can and will be served.  Of course, it would be nice to have it done with as little sacrifice as possible, and right now I think that is what most American's are hoping for.

Obama's Convention Speech

As a first time voter, without having heard Mitt Romney's point of view and convention speech, President Obama persuaded me to agree with many of the issues that he raised awareness to. I cannot tell if this is because I agree with him and his values, or if it's because he's just a fantastic public speaker that sends chills down my spine at times. He and the First Lady coordinated their speeches beautifully, bringing up her father and his grandmother, the typical hardworking American's that most of us aspire to be.

However, I tend to think that saying things like, “I’ve worked with business leaders who are bringing jobs back to America – not because our workers make less pay, but because we make better products. Because we work harder and smarter than anyone else,”  just gives his audience a self-esteem boost and pride, it isn't really facing the hundreds of issues that our government actually has. For right now I am undecided whether to side with his healthcare plan and tax solutions, and will make a more informed decision when I hear from Mitt Romney's convention speech.

I also have yet to decide which party I belong to, because I have values from both parties.  I tend to feel myself slowing shifting to the democratic side. (Please, don't tell my parents) Sometimes I find it hard to form my own opinion on politics because whoever you are learning from is completely and 100% biased toward their side, no matter how hard they try.

The speeches can be seen at the links below:

Barak Obama
Michelle Obama