College Student Newspapers

[AZCat]

We are not alone. Came across this today on AP. Truth? At least memorable.

While News Industry Struggles, College Students Are Supplying Some Memorable Journalism

 

[FeralFelidae]

Ambitious muckrakers trying to make a name for themselves.

 

[NUCat320]

Ambitious muckrakers trying to make a name for themselves.

They held the university accountable for trying to bury something pretty shameful as a non-story.

 

[techtim72]

Like almost all news journalists they approach their work with an agenda. It is not enough to provide balanced reporting that explores the topic. In fact, I am not clear that approach is even taught in journalism schools in an era of advocacy journalism where "two side-ism" is discouraged. So stories have an assumed villain, guilty until proven innocent, fitting a preferred social narrative. This behavior is rewarded in their profession because they are surrounded by others who have similar beliefs. In journalism schools, that likely includes their professors. So they are applauded for excellent work when in fact all they did was act as judge and jury rendering a verdict for the public to consume.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

They held the university accountable for trying to bury something pretty shameful as a non-story.

My hero’s.

 

[techtim72]

They held the university accountable for trying to bury something pretty shameful as a non-story.

Your comment captures the behavior of the Daily reporters perfectly. They believed that something shameful had happened - and my guess is they preferred something shameful had happened because it would better fit their social cause agenda - so they wrote the story with that flavor and bias. And yet we see post publication that there are many other opinions, belief systems, facts and uncertainties that deserved exploration. Exploring topics in detail isn't what most journalists do these days and my guess is they aren't even encouraged to do so by their professors if the exploration includes possibilities that aren't politically or socially popular in their world.

 

[NUCat320]

Your comment captures the behavior of the Daily reporters perfectly. They believed that something shameful had happened - and my guess is they preferred something shameful had happened because it would better fit their social cause agenda - so they wrote the story with that flavor and bias. And yet we see post publication that there are many other opinions belief systems, facts and uncertainties that deserved exploration. Exploring topics in detail isn't what most journalists do these days and my guess is they aren't even encouraged to do so by their professors if the exploration includes possibilities that aren't politically or socially popular in their world.

As a fan or graduate or whatever, knowing what you know now, are you satisfied with Northwestern’s initial release and the initial statements of Pat Fitzgerald, Derrick Gragg, and Michael Schill?


I understand (I’m guessing actually) that you would *prefer* that nothing came out, and that Pat Fitzgerald was still head coach.

However, given what we know (and the article in The Athletic is the best reporting), would you have been satisfied if all that came out was the Friday press release?

Transparency is good.

To be clear, they didn’t “believe something shameful had happened”, they *discovered* something shameful had happened after the administration told us only part of the story.

 

[techtim72]

The discussion on this subject is long and I won't rehash. Relative to your initial question, I believe the initial public actions by the University were poorly handled and matched equally by the accusatory tone and bias of the Daily reporting. No heroes in that crowd. Relative to whether the actions were "shameful", that is a loaded descriptor subject to wide interpretation. Let's just say I don't feel anymore certain about what happened than I did the first day Fitz's suspension was announced and I retain an open mind on the matter - other than Schill's and Gragg's actions have been grossly incompetent and the Daily's reporting has been self-serving, biased and incredibly harmful to the University and many, if not all, the individuals involved.

 

[NUCat320]

The discussion on this subject is long and I won't rehash. Relative to your initial question, I believe the initial public actions by the University was poorly handled, equally matched by the accusatory tone and bias of the Daily reporting. No heroes here.

Simple, yes or no:
Knowing what you know now, are you satisfied with what the university chose to tell you in the initial release?

 

[FeralFelidae]

Simple, yes or no:
Knowing what you know now, are you satisfied with what the university chose to tell you in the initial release?

I'm not satisfied with the Daily uncritically regurgitating Carl Richardson's allegations.

 

[NUCat320]

I'm not satisfied with the Daily uncritically regurgitating Carl Richardson's allegations.

Knowing what you know now, are you satisfied with the amount of information Northwestern University chose to share with you?

 

[FeralFelidae]

Knowing what you know now, are you satisfied with the amount of information Northwestern University chose to share with you?

No. As I said, they should release the report.

 

[NUCat320]

No. As I said, they should release the report.

And given that they were only planning to tell you what they released in early July, and they will *never* release the initial report, do you think as an interested alum/fan/donor, you deserve to know more?

 

[NU Houston]

And given that they were only planning to tell you what they released in early July, and they will *never* release the initial report, do you think as an interested alum/fan/donor, you deserve to know more?

Yes! Release the report! Even Fitz in his lawsuit said he hadn't seen it.

NU is asking me as an alumnus of the university to make a contribution of my time and money. In return, I request that they be more transparent regarding the process through which they fired Fitz and potentially brought significant legal liability onto the university. Release the report!

 

[techtim72]

And given that they were only planning to tell you what they released in early July, and they will *never* release the initial report, do you think as an interested alum/fan/donor, you deserve to know more?

No. Yes, although release of the full report might be unwise for legal and other reasons and more than reasonably required. Unrelated to the behavior of the Daily. The issue is the nature of their reporting not that additional information was provided.

 

[NUCat320]

They’re not releasing the report. They never intended to. They decided you shouldn’t know.

The Daily, like it or not, was the only reason anyone knows anything.

Are you more mad at the students and their imperfect reporting, or at the university that decided that you deserved nothing and should like it?

 

[techtim72]

Not an either/or.

 

[wildcatpn]

They’re not releasing the report. They never intended to. They decided you shouldn’t know.

The Daily, like it or not, was the only reason anyone knows anything.

Are you more mad at the students and their imperfect reporting, or at the university that decided that you deserved nothing and should like it?

How about we just be mad at all of them which would be justifiable. The University because it is being run by a bunch of clowns who continue to mess up over and over. And the student "journalists" who ran with a story that was handed to them that they knew would go national and they did no journalistic work on their side to present multiple sides of the story.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Simple, yes or no:
Knowing what you know now, are you satisfied with what the university chose to tell you in the initial release?

100% yes.

So either Richardson or a Trustee (or both) talked to the Daily before Schill announced the suspension, given the speed at which they published the allegations.

You can deny this all you want, but use your head.

All Schill had to do was say "The matter has been reviewed and due to privacy concerns we will not comment further."

Instead he wet his pants.

 

[NUCat320]

How about we just be mad at all of them which would be justifiable. The University because it is being run by a bunch of clowns who continue to mess up over and over. And the student "journalists" who ran with a story that was handed to them that they knew would go national and they did no journalistic work on their side to present multiple sides of the story.

They did. The university declined to comment.

The Daily was writing in response to a university press release, and when they asked the university to comment on their new reporting, the university told them to go away.

I feel for this guy. Second month on the job, he was handed a scandal, and he (a journalist himself) told the student journalists to shove it.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jon-yates-5a925511

Imagine if, in response, they released the report.


So, again, would you rather know:
- there was hazing
- no more Kenosha
- locker room monitors
- two week suspension
- no further comment

or

- running is dry humping
- running was well known within the program
- kids drank Gatorade to the point of puking
- linemen rubbed their wangs on freshmen


Do you think it is better if you know “run along, nothing to see here”, or “actually, stuff happened” ?

 

[wildcatpn]

They did. The university declined to comment.

The Daily was writing in response to a university press release, and when they asked the university to comment on their new reporting, the university told them to go away.

I feel for this guy. Second month on the job, he was handed a scandal, and he (a journalist himself) told the student journalists to shove it.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jon-yates-5a925511

Imagine if, in response, they released the report.


So, again, would you rather know:
- there was hazing
- no more Kenosha
- locker room monitors
- two week suspension
- no further comment

or

- running is dry humping
- running was well known within the program
- kids drank Gatorade to the point of puking
- linemen rubbed their wangs on freshmen


Do you think it is better if you know “run along, nothing to see here”, or “actually, stuff happened” ?

The Daily was writing in response to a university press release? They were writing because a disgruntled 5th string QB who had an agenda against Fitz handed it to them on a platter because he was unhappy about the punishment the University handed down. And they immediately ran with it.

Not that this has anything to do with the subject at hand but you're vernacular when it comes to the alleged hazing is really strange.

 

[NUCat320]

The Daily was writing in response to a university press release? They were writing because a disgruntled 5th string QB who had an agenda against Fitz handed it to them on a platter because he was unhappy about the punishment the University handed down. And they immediately ran with it.

Not that this has anything to do with the subject at hand but you're vernacular when it comes to the alleged hazing is really strange.

The university issued a press release.
The Daily investigated what *wasn’t* in the release.

Given a chance to present their side, the University declined.

I guess I’m not sure what you disagree with.

 

[FeralFelidae]

The university issued a press release.
The Daily investigated what *wasn’t* in the release.

Given a chance to present their side, the University declined.

I guess I’m not sure what you disagree with.

What did they do to investigate?

 

[IGNORE2]

What did they do to investigate?

Enough to bring more facts to light than had they not.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Enough to bring more facts to light than had they not.

Facts? Ok. It’s a fact the Israeli’s are bombing Gaza. No more to the story right?

 

[BleedingPurple15]

You could provide one-sided facts and it'd still be facts, but it wouldn't be balanced, fair, or complete.

 

[T_Levine]

Interesting discussion.

I can tell you, there are alums who want to take the same route as Harvard alums and list names of students in student organizations and at the daily to make sure they never get jobs with their companies.

While some may agree with daily reporting, there are many others who have a different POV. It’s not just sports stories. Stories from this week leave out important pieces of information which indicates a lack of curiosity by writers. I think the football stories this past summer has some of that as well.

I haven’t taken a side…..yet. I submitted a letter to the editor at the daily and am waiting to hear if it will be published. That will shape my opinion.

 

[techtim72]

Interesting discussion.

I can tell you, there are alums who want to take the same route as Harvard alums and list names of students in student organizations and at the daily to make sure they never get jobs with their companies.

While some may agree with daily reporting, there are many others who have a different POV. It’s not just sports stories. Stories from this week leave out important pieces of information which indicates a lack of curiosity by writers. I think the football stories this past summer has some of that as well.

I haven’t taken a side…..yet. I submitted a letter to the editor at the daily and am waiting to hear if it will be published. That will shape my opinion.

"Lack of curiosity". So politely stated and yet so accurate.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Facts? Ok. It’s a fact the Israeli’s are bombing Gaza. No more to the story right?

Them's the facts.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Listen to NPR for 15 minutes and it becomes clear that the Israelis are the terrorists.

SMH

Why? I can just be educated by the “Human Rights” club at NU.

 

[Deeringfish]

We are not alone. Came across this today on AP. Truth? At least memorable.

While News Industry Struggles, College Students Are Supplying Some Memorable Journalism

As a child of the 60's and 70's I guess I shouldn't be surprised to find young 20 something's being anti-establishment and full of themselves in how they express things.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

You could provide one-sided facts and it'd still be facts, but it wouldn't be balanced, fair, or complete.

The most disappointing thing about the way the media covered the allegations was that no one stopped to ask why. Thats the first question you ask after you hear what happened. You HAVE to investigate the reasons.
Why did groups of team leaders subject their teammates to embarrassing physical interaction?
The Daily simply assumed that many/most of their classmates on the football team were sick and abusive. It fit the mindset of many at Northwestern - never mind that these people are sitting in class next to you.
Nobody asked if it was punishment for failing to uphold team standards or any other reason.

Essentially this became a mission with two goals... make things seem really bad in order to fire Fitzgerald, but then make it clear that none of the perpetrators did anything that warranted punishment.

 

[Deeringfish]

The most disappointing thing about the way the media covered the allegations was that no one stopped to ask why. Thats the first question you ask after you hear what happened. You HAVE to investigate the reasons.
Why did groups of team leaders subject their teammates to embarrassing physical interaction?
The Daily simply assumed that many/most of their classmates on the football team were sick and abusive. It fit the mindset of many at Northwestern - never mind that these people are sitting in class next to you.
Nobody asked if it was punishment for failing to uphold team standards or any other reason.

Essentially this became a mission with two goals... make things seem really bad in order to fire Fitzgerald, but then make it clear that none of the perpetrators did anything that warranted punishment.

I get what your saying about motive but hazing is never a legitimate punishment.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

I get what your saying about motive but hazing is never a legitimate punishment.

Since anything can be construed as hazing, you are basically saying that punishment is never legitimate.

Hey you - #14 - you're dogging it again, you've been dogging it for weeks. You keep running your mouth and bitching about the coaches. You are undermining the team... We've talked about this several times... Everybody else is out here busting their asses to try to improve - and you're laughing about it.

What does a coach / team do?

*this is a hypothetical situation - not saying it describes what sometimes happened at NU, although it may.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

They did. The university declined to comment.

The Daily was writing in response to a university press release, and when they asked the university to comment on their new reporting, the university told them to go away.

I feel for this guy. Second month on the job, he was handed a scandal, and he (a journalist himself) told the student journalists to shove it.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jon-yates-5a925511

Imagine if, in response, they released the report.


So, again, would you rather know:
- there was hazing
- no more Kenosha
- locker room monitors
- two week suspension
- no further comment

or

- running is dry humping
- running was well known within the program
- kids drank Gatorade to the point of puking
- linemen rubbed their wangs on freshmen


Do you think it is better if you know “run along, nothing to see here”, or “actually, stuff happened” ?

Are you asking this as satire or are you serious?
Its a no-brainer.
Solve the problem and move on.
Everyone would have been better served if Schill had done as advised.
Except the attorneys. And the few people who are infatuated with what goes on in a locker room.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Purple Pile Driver wrote

"Its a fact the **********'s are bombing *********. No more to the story, right?"

That is not a political comment.
PPD is citing an example of how someone could report "the truth" while attempting to influence the reader's opinion by leaving important details out of the story.

Its actually the opposite of a political comment. A simple call for honest reporting, with no agenda.

Hungry Jack responded

"Listen to ***** for 15 minutes and it becomes clear that the ******** are the terrorists"

This is a political comment. Sorry Hungry Jack, Cappy's talking to your parents...

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Purple Pile Driver wrote

"Its a fact the **********'s are bombing *********. No more to the story, right?"

That is not a political comment.
PPD is citing an example of how someone could report "the truth" while attempting to influence the reader's opinion by leaving important details out of the story.

Its actually the opposite of a political comment. A simple call for honest reporting, with no agenda.

Hungry Jack responded

"Listen to ***** for 15 minutes and it becomes clear that the ******** are the terrorists"

This is a political comment. Sorry Hungry Jack, Cappy's talking to your parents...

Whatever our Moderator wants to do, he’ll do. This board is getting as bad as the failed Scout board where Medline was publisher. Are you listening Sweet Lou?

We somehow allow the same handful of posters bring up the same shit over and over to stir things up and censor other comments that directly relate to NU’s handling of student protests during a world crisis. I wonder why threads get sideways when the constant repetition of posts is allowed. Yet the responders are the problem!

We allow this picture of out of control players hazing on campus, while we protect witch hunt student journalism and a human rights club that supports terrorists the loo off heads of babies.

No wonder, Lunker, AOF and others have left. Wonder if this post will survive the 2 day warning period or be immediately removed?

 

[CappyNU]

"Its a fact the **********'s are bombing *********. No more to the story, right?"

That is not a political comment.
PPD is citing an example of how someone could report "the truth" while attempting to influence the reader's opinion by leaving important details out of the story.

Its actually the opposite of a political comment. A simple call for honest reporting, with no agenda..

Right, so he could have used any other example that was not related to current political issues, but he chose not to, which is why it is political.

 

[CappyNU]

Whatever our Moderator wants to do, he’ll do. This board is getting as bad as the failed Scout board where Medline was publisher. Are you listening Sweet Lou?

We somehow allow the same handful of posters bring up the same shit over and over to stir things up and censor other comments that directly relate to NU’s handling of student protests during a world crisis. I wonder why threads get sideways when the constant repetition of posts is allowed. Yet the responders are the problem!

We allow this picture of out of control players hazing on campus, while we protect witch hunt student journalism and a human rights club that supports terrorists the loo off heads of babies.

No wonder, Lunker, AOF and others have left. Wonder if this post will survive the 2 day warning period or be immediately removed?

What exactly would you like me to do? Because in the same sentence you're saying that I'm allowing too much of one thing and not enough of another. So am I just supposed to censor the things that bother you personally?

 

[techtim72]

Better to keep off the politics. A few punches back and forth and then off to the lockers with the comments. You are doing fine Cappy. I toss in a political comment now and then just for exercise.