New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Politics
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  /

    Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (3882 previous messages)

lchic - 01:36am Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3883 of 3888)

how news is put together.

In newsrooms across the nation, a large proportion of what appears in the morning newspaper was written the day before without the bylined journalist leaving the office. It's a trend that's not confined to Australia – and one that has well and truly been noticed by the influence shapers, such as Ogilvy PR's Asia-Pacific group chief Matthew Anderson, who spoke in Australia last month about the shifting dynamics of newsrooms.

"Some have changed the types of reporters who work for them, while others have modified the editing process," he said. "Many older, more experienced journalists have been replaced by younger ones, and so institutional memory has been lost. Moreover, we are seeing more news content coming straight from the wire services rather than primary reporting. News media continues to consolidate and close."

The point of difference – even among newsrooms – is whether this all matters – after all, information is still flowing, people are still being informed and anyone, from municipal groups to large corporates, have a right to get their message out.

PR .... Much is taken up with communicating to key stakeholders such as governments, business partners and regulators. Many PR operatives rarely ever have an interface with a working journalist.

According to McLachlan, PR is more often than not a world far removed from the seminal 1995 book Toxic Sludge is good for you! Lies, Damn Lies and the Public Relations Industry, penned by Americans John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton. In their book, they quoted figures showing America had 150,000 PR practitioners – outnumbering the country's 130,000 reporters by about 10 per cent.

McLachlan says the Golden World 2002 PR Industry award he won stemmed from a straightforward strategy of being honest about the company's crippled production lines and exposure to financial loss.

telling the truth to journalists also had a strategic impetus – helping the company to re-establish its credentials as transparent and accountable when its brand was eventually relaunched.

Despite the occasional synergy, if the argument is boiled down to strength in numbers, PR has the upper hand.

In Australia, the prevailing wisdom is that there are roughly 20 per cent more PR practitioners than journalists – although a precise comparison is difficult to pin down.

Even the professional bodies representing both industries – for journalism, the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, and for PR, the Public Relations Institute of Australia – can't provide specifics.

Perhaps the most detailed estimate was conducted by the University of Queensland in the mid-1990s. Its research showed there were about 4500 journalists working in the mainstream Australian news media at that time, including journalists and editorial staff – but not photographers, or artists – of all levels.

.... "The ratio of reporters to PRs is much more stark," he says. "Ten years ago, ministers were lucky to have one press secretary, now many of them have three or more ....

.... "The training of journalists is not the same as it was in the past," he says. "About half the staff of a major paper is doing magazines and lifestyle stuff, which is part of journalism, but it's not the hard core. And hard-core journalism values are not necessarily being developed. It's very tempting for young journalists to be doing film reviews and TV quips and to get their picture and byline in the paper, but what they miss out on is the critical grounding that previous generations got doing the police beat, the courts and using their eyes and ears as well as telephone and email.

"It's been going on for 10 to 15 years, but getting more pronounced all the time."

lchic - 01:38am Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3884 of 3888)

"In days gone by, the most venerated journalists found their news among the people," said Hartigan in a speech about the future of newspapers. "They congregated in pubs, among the coppers and crims; they sniffed out their scoops in bars and public places, and they talked to people, face to face, living the truism – you don't find news hanging around the office.

"Today we find our reporters from tertiary-educated backgrounds, where so many seem to aspire to present A Current Affair – but know nothing of, and seem to resent, the years of experience and work it takes to get there.

"Today we are in danger of producing a generation of journalists who know people only over the telephone – and then, only hear the views of spin doctors, whether they be corporate or political.

"Today, the tendency is for the top journalists, particularly those known as the opinion-makers, to dine in the best restaurants, be seen in all the right places and live in the best addresses.

"Today the tendency among snob journalists is to observe the world from a quiet and carpeted office; to contemplate where one might go for a superior coffee or cuisine, to sit back and let the press releases roll in, to choose the news from wire services, agencies or handouts, rather than getting out there and finding it – fresh and raw."

~~~~~

From my point of view, I'd much rather have a specialist, the more experienced journalists, doing the work, because they understand the issues better and they are able to make better judgments, examine things more critically and recognise trends in a particular area," Smith says. "With a lot of younger journalists that aren't specialists in their field, I think they've got an instinctive response to put up the shutters."

Of some solace is the view of Smith and other issues management consultants interviewed for this piece that there is still a strong body of senior journalists in newsrooms despite the intrusion of the PR industry – providing both mentoring and wisdom to those new to the job.

"At the top end of the media, they are better than ever," Smith says. "The best of journalism is better than it's ever been, but I've got concerns about the middle and the next generation, because the nature of media has changed.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,4937038%5E7582,00.html

End

More Messages Recent Messages (4 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us