Daily Archives: April 10, 2012

* How Bloomberg broke the Washington Post’s Santorum scoop. (Michael Calderone)
* BuzzFeed: As of now, no one is taking credit for breaking the Santorum dropout story. (BuzzFeed)
* Seven-in-ten blacks say they followed Trayvon developments more closely than any other story vs. 26% of whites. (
* USA Today publisher David Hunke named the newspaper’s chairman; he’ll retire from Gannett in September. (AP via USA Today)
* “It’s impossible to confirm 100% that it was George Zimmerman with whom I was speaking,” but… (
* More names of journalists who got information from an ex-CIA officer are disclosed. (

How did the Orange County Register’s “News Mob” at last Friday’s Angels opening game go? Angels editor Keith Sharon gives Romenesko readers this report:

The News Mob by the numbers (final):

* 91 reporters, editors, photographers, graphic artists, designers, videographers, bloggers and miscellaneous Register and Freedom employees

* 56 stories (5 of them with multiple live updates)

* 845 photographs either taken live or posted by the Register on April 6.

* 88 submissions of photos and stories by Angels (and non-Angels) fans

* 156 new signups for the OCRegister mobile app (downloaded AND opened)

* 24 percent increase in mobile app visits that day

* 27,000: the number of references found with the Google search: Orange County Angels News Mob.

* 1,218 percent increase in Angels page views from Opening Day 2011 to Opening Day 2012

Gawker has found a Fox News employee who’s willing to write a regular column about the doings inside Roger Ailes’ operation. You can bet that the network’s notorious PR machine is working hard to identify the leaker, who writes:

“So why not just leave Fox News?” you might ask. Good question! I’ve asked myself that same thing many times. And I am leaving. Sooner rather than later, I’m guessing. But I can’t just leave quietly, can I? Where’s the fun in that? So I’m John McClane-ing this shit. I’m inside the building, crawling through the air vents, gathering intel, and passing it along to Carl Winslow.

* Announcing our newest hire: A Fox News employee
* Earlier: Dealing with the Fox News PR machine

I called KSL-TV in Salt Lake City and forwarded this image to Janelle (she didn’t want to give her last name) on the news desk. She said she was familiar with the interview but hadn’t noticed the legs and didn’t get any calls about them. Janelle promised she’d look into this and get back to me.

UPDATE: An email from says:

I’m being told we met the interviewee at a softball park where his daughter was playing so we could grab an interview.

It’s just a kid messing around in the background that the photographer didn’t catch.

The Media Research Center had a few of its representatives picket the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel over the weekend, with many holding signs that said, “Don’t believe the liberal media.”

The Madison Capital Times questioned the conservative group’s target choice, pointing out that:

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel endorsed Scott Walker for governor.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has supported much of Walker’s agenda.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has opposed the effort to recall Walker.

But the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has reported on the John Doe inquiry that has seen a number of Walker’s closest aides and contributors charged with felony wrongdoing.

Does that make the Journal Sentinel anti-Walker? Anti-Republican?

Is it a practitioner of “media bias”?

From the PLAISTED WRITES blog: “You had to wonder what the hell all those people were doing at the headquarters of the biggest supporter of the FitzWalkerstan regime in the straight media.”

* Protesters picket Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
* How sympathetic should the media be to Walker?

This Steve Brill and Micah Sifry email exchange about Sifry’s “Watergate and the Internet” post was sent to me to share with Romenesko readers:

On 4/10/12 8:01 AM, “Micah Sifry” wrote:

Steve Brill

Steve [Brill]:

Thanks for making time to talk with me on Sunday.

Here’s the piece: [URL removed]

Stay in touch.


Brill responded:

On 4/10/12 8:43 AM, “Steven Brill” wrote:

You didn’t tell me [about] the Jay Rosen piece. Can you send me the earlier piece you posted? I would really like to see it — and use it for my class as an example of a certain kind of fact-free journalism. And could you explain in detail the “accident” that led you to post it early. Please be specific, so that I can understand that it was really a technical accident, not that you got second thoughts after Woodward complained. Please send asap, as I might use for my Reuters column as well as in class.

* Jay Rosen: “I apologize to Mr. Woodward. I’m sorry I wrote that, Bob. I was wrong.”

UPDATE: I invited Sifry to comment and he sent the following:

Here’s the email I literally just sent to Brill in response to him.


11:58 AM (0 minutes ago) to Steven


The original unfinished draft is below.

Micah Sifry

The earlier piece was basically the first 10 grafs of the final version, ending on the Jay Rosen quote, and then followed by this bit of material, which I’ve dropped from the final version because it was irrelevant. (I also cut out my parenthetical remark in the first draft about Josh Marshall, because as I continued reporting on this I learned that he indeed was on the ASNE panel and his Gonzalez story was discussed):

Well, Internet, what do you think?

On the Yale Daily News website, a blog post about the Woodward anecdote drew this comment from a student named Colin Ross, who writes for the YDN: “I was in the class in question. I don’t recall it being so blatant as saying we could just google Nixon’s secret fund, but some papers did rely heavily on the power of the Internet rather than the hard work of journalism. So no, it’s not a fabrication. An oversimplification, maybe, but he’s right to worry about over-reliance on the Internet.”

I’ve reached out to Ross, as well as to Mark Schoofs, who teaches a class on journalism at Yale this spring, for comment.

Obviously, I wasn’t done yet with the piece. /CONTINUES Read More

An editor’s note explains why the top half of today’s Daily Californian front page is blank:

For 141 years, this paper has been a regular fixture on campus, informing students of the most important issues affecting our community.

Starting today, students will head to the polls to vote on whether a $2 semester fee is worth sustaining The Daily Californian for five years in the most volatile chapter in the history of journalism.

Today’s front page above the fold is blank. There are no stories on the ASUC election, nothing about this year’s increase in crime, no photos of police officers using force against protesters and no notice of future tuition increases. The coverage you are used to is on page 2, and after today, it will continue as it has since 1871.

But if the V.O.I.C.E. Initiative does not pass, that may not be the case for long.

* Read the Daily Californian e-edition

* Jack Shafer: $1B is a lot of money for a young company without real revenues, but the Instagram deal is a smart one. (
* How Bill Marimow might change the Philadelphia Inquirer newsroom. (
* The rise of Twitter and Facebook make teens “feel completely entitled” to just ask a celebrity to be their Prom date. (USA Today)
* “Time has gotten a lot of mileage out of its relationship with George Clooney.” He’ll sit at the magazine’s WHCA dinner table. (
* The first serious Craig Claiborne biography is coming out on the 50th anniversary of his first NYT restaurant review. (New York Times)
* Jay Rosen: “Anatomy of a Facebook Fail: Mine.” (Jay Rosen)
* “I really can’t comment on a colleague’s column,” David Brooks says when asked about Paul Krugman’s Monday piece. (Huffington Post)
* Dennis Ryerson to step down as Indianapolis Star editor and become a part-time columnist/editorial writer. (Indianapolis Star)