Cop in Charge of Convention on Minnpost

The Minnpost is a relatively new news source. It's put out by a former publisher of the Star Tribune and its list of writers reads like a who's who of people purged from local newsrooms in recent years. It does, however, seem kind of weird. It's like old media (newspaper) trying to be new media, with the same archaic format. At this point, there's very few interactive resources, and there's actually very few pictures. In any case, Minnpost is new, and for now it stands firmly on the quality of its writing and reporting.

MPD assistant chief Matt Bostrom, and his role in organizing security for the RNC next year, is reported on by former strib columnist Doug Grow.

The story starts by setting up the scene of a meeting between old school 60s peace and justice people and Bostrom, the kicker being that they give him a standing ovation. It goes into the lack of trust between cops and protesters (including the Ramsey County debacle of building pens for protesters). It goes into free speech issues, past anti-convention protests, and articulates a "Minnesota model" based on free speech and, perhaps, using "peaceful" protesters to inform on radical ones.

All in all it's a well-written piece. Grow could have, however, tried to talk to some younger activists. He managed to demonize them instead.

Maybe that's a metaphor for the Boomer dominated old-media of Minnpost. Sure they are covering that same demographic that still read the Star Tribune, but what about younger people and the non-traditional readers? Maybe, just like this story isn't a complete picture of convention protesters, MinnPost isn't a very complete prediction of the future of this 'new' media.

Cellphone Surveys and their problems in NYT

The New York Times had a great story today about how cell phones are making accurate polling more difficult. This is relevant because we read polls every few days about the presidential election thats still more than a year away. The fact that so many people, especially young people, only have cell phones these days, means that results will be very unrepresentative. There's already all the debate about whether treating elections like a horse race (and it's Hillary by a nose), effects results, now we wonder, are the results already skewed by the technology?

The story starts by explaining how pollsters gather results and telling how prolific cell phones have become. This backed-up by a ton of stats from places like the FCC and pew center etc. It is not until more than halfway down the page that a living human talks to us, sums it all up, although he talks through email.

The article ends with quotes saying pollsters are going to meet this challenge. But, they don't describe the HOW of it. I want to know. Are they gonna figure something out with phone companies (and what do those people think)?

Jennifer Love Hewitt controversy: New or Newz?

Thank you Chicago Tribune. It seems like the "respectable" media uses the internet gossip columns as an excuse to talk about things like Jennifer Love Hewitt's bikini controversy. It's not news, not really. It's an excuse to put a picture of her in a bikini on the site, and it sure attracts a lot of attention (being at the top of the most emailed story). The gist of it is that JLH was photographed at beach, people thought she looked overweight on the internet, they made fun of her, she reacted by pointing out that a size 2 is not, by any stretch of the imagination, fat. Good point right. BUT, is it news? Or "Newz"?

The excuse for it is that JLH defended herself on her website by saying,
"To all girls with butts, boobs, hips and a waist," she wrote, "put on a bikini -- put it on and stay strong."
Alright, maybe it would be relevant if she started a foundation, donated money to stop eating disorders, or some real reaction. Instead, it becomes a gossip column.

More Polls in Iowa: Lead with accuracy?

A new poll was released by the Des Moines Register. It shows Obama and Huckabee with narrow leads, with Clinton and Romney falling. The rest of the candidates are staying consistent. This is MORE newsworthy because a week or two back another poll showed Obama in the lead. It was covered by Fox and Reuters. The problem I have with these polls, apart from the content-free horse race aspect, is that they could be completely inaccurate. The margin of error is 4.4% points. That means that not only could Clinton still be in the lead, but John Edwards could be. THese polls also don't know exactly who will caucus, or how forcefully. TO me, it's a little bit disturbing to focus so much on these polls when, if the margin of error is taken into account, they are not definite.

Last week the Zogby poll that showed Clinton would lose to Republicans was heralded. However, reading the fine print would tell you that, unlike the previous polls, it was done online. WTF. We all know how unreliable online-ness is. Is it the media's responsibility to mention the margin of error, and explain what that means, right away? I think yes.

"Teddy Trouble"

Let me first say, I didn't come up with that title. Obviously, it's a reference from the Christian Science Monitor about the British teacher who allowed her students to name a teddy bear Mohammed (everyone seems to spell it differently). The story has already been broken, so what we're seeing now is analysis. The HIndu and the Christian Science Monitor both talk about how England is trying to negotiate with Sudanese authorities.

Both articles follow a similar pattern, noting that England is negotiating, giving us background, noting the protests calling for her "execution." In a way, I was a little bit skeptical of the way the media covered this story of protests. As the CSM notes, even the BBC thought protests were suspiciously well-organized. By giving so much attention to a fringe, or a government ploy, without including other more moderate views that are more representative, the media gives westerners the idea that all Muslims are ridiculously extreme. The fact that the story of who was behind the protests hasn't yet come out, is a little disturbing to me. The CSM does a better job of mentioning this. It's a case where the media gets to really frame the public's perspective on a whole groups of people, very important, especially in these times.