I'm writing this morning from Lake Placid, where I'm attending the N.Y. Press Association's publishers' convention. I'm sitting in the bistro of the inn where the convention is being held, next to a window overlooking Mirror Lake. The sky's just getting light and, while it's overcast, it's not raining. It's a lovely sight. Lake Placid is a nice little town, lots of great little shops. Our first seminar isn't until 11 AM this morning, so I'm planning to walk the 2.7 mile trail around the lake.
Being new to the role of publisher, there's so much to learn, and the workshops have been quite informative.
One of the seminars I was most interested in was about — you guessed it — blogs. Weblogs — blogs for short — are actually part of a broader phenomenon the seminar presenters call citizen journalism. They talk about it as "unbundled journalism" or the decentralization of journalistic functions. The way journalism has traditionally worked, news organizations tell people what the news is, and the rest of us are consumers of the news. With the widespread access to the internet, that model is changing rapidly. It may even disappear altogether.
The seminar presenters yesterday challenged us to re-envision our news organizations as part of the public conversation, not as 'owning' or defining the news. That's a really big and difficult challenge for most publishers, who tend to see it as turning 'the way things work' right on their head. It's also somewhat threatening, because we fear being usurped. The way I look at it, this is happening with or without us, so journalists and publishers had better figure out how to embrace it and adapt what we do to it, or risk being left in the dust. (If you're interested in this, check out the website IReporter.org.
After attending that seminar yesterday I went online and looked at my last post and felt embarrassed by how snarky I was. I apologize. I was feeling frustrated by all the repetitive snipes at the supervisor and two councilwomen, and the rather low level of public discourse we've been witnessing in the early stages of this year's local election campaign. I asked the speakers at yesterday's seminar how to deal with that sort of thing, and they advised me to (1) work to encourage others to post more meaningful comments and (2) just delete the ones that are bogging down discussion like that. But I really hate the idea of deleting comments. I'd rather just ignore them if I can. What do you think?
I came away from that seminar yesterday with a whole bunch of ideas. What if Times/Review started a community website where we can feature the blogs of maybe six or ten people— or more? Different people could rotate in and out of the role of blogger. There could also be topical discussion forums there. What do you think of that idea? Do you have any other ideas for a site like that? Anybody interested in participating? Please post here or send me an email and let me know.
I've been out of town since early Thursday morning. What's going on? Anything new? There's been lots of rain from Ophelia, right? How much? Have we had any flooding? High winds? Any intrepid citizen reporters out there willing to post some local news?
Meanwhile, I think I'll take that walk.
Saturday, September 17, 2005
Thursday, September 15, 2005
Let's rise above the muck, shall we?
From now on, any comment that is not a comment on the subject of the post it's attached to will be deleted.
Comments that are nothing but repetitive name-calling and "Hooray for our team! Let's throw the other bums out" will be deleted.
If you've got something to say, say it well. Posting essentially the same thing over and over again only shows the rest of the world that you've got too much time on your hands, whoever you are. And, frankly, it's really boring for everyone else to read.
Can't we have some intelligent discussion in Riverhead? Does it always have to sink to the level of name-calling and made-up allegations masquerading as facts just to "get" someone and/or advance your own personal agenda?
When people who truly want to serve the public have to be subjected to this nonsense, and have themselves and their families dragged through the mud as the price they pay for trying to give something back to the community, what is the net effect? Good people, people of conscience, people who aren't involved in "politics" just to line their own pockets, get turned off and drop out. Nobody with half a brain voluntarily subjects himself to character assassination for too long. And what are we left with? Look around.
This blog wasn't started an excuse or an opportunity for one "side" or the other to slam the other "side." It was meant to be a place for discussion, debate, exchange of ideas, etc. If you have nothing more to say than one-line zingers bashing a public official, ANY public official, go post on 631politics.com. There are plenty of people who seem to spend an inordinate amount of time on that message board, hiding behind the anonymity of the Internet, propagating and feeding on that kind of mindless garbage.
You want to have a frank discussion about pertinent issues facing Riverhead today? Great! I'm all ears. But if all you can offer is continued blather about how Blass, Sanders & Cardinale are responsible for all the ills of the world, I invite you to go blather somewhere else. Maybe start your own blog.
We just witnessed a really ugly primary campaign in this town, characterized by the same sort of mindless, gutless, personal attacks on people running for public office. I'm sure we're in for more of the same in the weeks between now and Nov. 8. Ick.
Comments that are nothing but repetitive name-calling and "Hooray for our team! Let's throw the other bums out" will be deleted.
If you've got something to say, say it well. Posting essentially the same thing over and over again only shows the rest of the world that you've got too much time on your hands, whoever you are. And, frankly, it's really boring for everyone else to read.
Can't we have some intelligent discussion in Riverhead? Does it always have to sink to the level of name-calling and made-up allegations masquerading as facts just to "get" someone and/or advance your own personal agenda?
When people who truly want to serve the public have to be subjected to this nonsense, and have themselves and their families dragged through the mud as the price they pay for trying to give something back to the community, what is the net effect? Good people, people of conscience, people who aren't involved in "politics" just to line their own pockets, get turned off and drop out. Nobody with half a brain voluntarily subjects himself to character assassination for too long. And what are we left with? Look around.
This blog wasn't started an excuse or an opportunity for one "side" or the other to slam the other "side." It was meant to be a place for discussion, debate, exchange of ideas, etc. If you have nothing more to say than one-line zingers bashing a public official, ANY public official, go post on 631politics.com. There are plenty of people who seem to spend an inordinate amount of time on that message board, hiding behind the anonymity of the Internet, propagating and feeding on that kind of mindless garbage.
You want to have a frank discussion about pertinent issues facing Riverhead today? Great! I'm all ears. But if all you can offer is continued blather about how Blass, Sanders & Cardinale are responsible for all the ills of the world, I invite you to go blather somewhere else. Maybe start your own blog.
We just witnessed a really ugly primary campaign in this town, characterized by the same sort of mindless, gutless, personal attacks on people running for public office. I'm sure we're in for more of the same in the weeks between now and Nov. 8. Ick.
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
The teabag test
I once read in a great book about living a Christian life that a person is like a teabag. When submerged in hot water, the stuff on the inside seeps out, and we get to see what's there.
When I arrived home from work yesterday-- Monday, the day before Primary Day -- there were three glossy campaign mailers in our pile of mail, all of them from the Dunleavy camp. They were mailed to my house because my husband is a lifelong registered Republican.
Two of them were nasty attacks on his two opponents in today's party primary.
One slams Rose Sanders for having a full-time job in the County Clerk's office. Accusing her of double-dipping, it also slams her for having a husband employed by the county. Now even if Rose and her husband have political patronage jobs, I've got to wonder how the Republican camp can suddenly get indignant about that? Doesn't Riverhead GOP chairman Bruce Stuke work at OTB? Doesn't his wife have a county job, too? What's that? Something other than patronage? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Many Riverhead Republican committeepeople and their family members have government jobs. If there's one thing the Suffolk County Republican political machine has been good at for generations, it's patronage! So talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
The other mailer actually raps Blass and Sanders for cooperating and working together. It includes a color photo of conjoined twins! (Llamas, I think, joined at the hindquarters.) This one also includes a picture of Blass & Sanders with Sen. Clinton, when she came to Wading River to announce her opposition to Broadwater. That photo is captioned: "Birds of a feather???"
Neither one of these attack pieces has a name attached to it, so you don't know who sent it. Now, there's real character for you! There is a return address on both of them: 2906 Pebble Beach Path, Riverhead. And the Bulk Mail permit on both of them is Permit No. 4, Westhampton.
The third piece seems like a more benign, positive piece advocating John Dunleavy for councilman. While it lacks the "2906 Pebble Beach Path" return address, it has the same Bulk Mail permit affixed to it.
The problem with this one is the statement, in bold print: "Without your vote [in the Sept. 13 primary] my name will not appear on the ballot for the General Election in November." That's just not true. Mr. Dunleavy has the Conservative Party line, last I heard. So he's on the ballot this November regardless of what happens today.
Submerged in "hot water" -- a tough primary race --we now know what this candidate has on the inside. Nasty attacks and twisted facts. I'm not a Republican, but if I were, Mr. Dunleavy's mailers yesterday would have made up my mind for me about how to vote. And it wouldn't have been the conclusion Mr. Dunleavy was hoping for.
When I arrived home from work yesterday-- Monday, the day before Primary Day -- there were three glossy campaign mailers in our pile of mail, all of them from the Dunleavy camp. They were mailed to my house because my husband is a lifelong registered Republican.
Two of them were nasty attacks on his two opponents in today's party primary.
One slams Rose Sanders for having a full-time job in the County Clerk's office. Accusing her of double-dipping, it also slams her for having a husband employed by the county. Now even if Rose and her husband have political patronage jobs, I've got to wonder how the Republican camp can suddenly get indignant about that? Doesn't Riverhead GOP chairman Bruce Stuke work at OTB? Doesn't his wife have a county job, too? What's that? Something other than patronage? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Many Riverhead Republican committeepeople and their family members have government jobs. If there's one thing the Suffolk County Republican political machine has been good at for generations, it's patronage! So talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
The other mailer actually raps Blass and Sanders for cooperating and working together. It includes a color photo of conjoined twins! (Llamas, I think, joined at the hindquarters.) This one also includes a picture of Blass & Sanders with Sen. Clinton, when she came to Wading River to announce her opposition to Broadwater. That photo is captioned: "Birds of a feather???"
Neither one of these attack pieces has a name attached to it, so you don't know who sent it. Now, there's real character for you! There is a return address on both of them: 2906 Pebble Beach Path, Riverhead. And the Bulk Mail permit on both of them is Permit No. 4, Westhampton.
The third piece seems like a more benign, positive piece advocating John Dunleavy for councilman. While it lacks the "2906 Pebble Beach Path" return address, it has the same Bulk Mail permit affixed to it.
The problem with this one is the statement, in bold print: "Without your vote [in the Sept. 13 primary] my name will not appear on the ballot for the General Election in November." That's just not true. Mr. Dunleavy has the Conservative Party line, last I heard. So he's on the ballot this November regardless of what happens today.
Submerged in "hot water" -- a tough primary race --we now know what this candidate has on the inside. Nasty attacks and twisted facts. I'm not a Republican, but if I were, Mr. Dunleavy's mailers yesterday would have made up my mind for me about how to vote. And it wouldn't have been the conclusion Mr. Dunleavy was hoping for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
