Newspaper refused to print the word “gay,” used find-and-replace, called sprinter Tyson Gay “Tyson Homosexual.” voices.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2008/07…
— Francis Lam (@Francis_Lam) August 6, 2012
It was four years ago when the conservative American Family Association’s OneNewsNow site changed sprinter Tyson Gay’s name to Tyson Homosexual. (Tyson Homosexual was a blur in blue, sprinting 100 meters faster than anyone ever has. …”It means a lot to me,” the 25-year-old Homosexual said. “I’m glad my body could do it, because now I know I have it in me.”)
The news director of OneNewsNow told Mary Ann Akers in 2008: “We took the filter out for that word” after Tyson Homosexual surfaced on the site. “We don’t object to the word ‘gay,'” except “when it refers to people who practice a homosexual lifestyle.” (He said a “software glitch” was responsible for the sprinter’s name being changed.)
The “G” word, the news director complained, has “been co-opted by a particular group of people.”
The AFA apparently has changed its thinking over the years: right now I see the word “gay” used seven times on One News Now’s home page.
* July 1, 2008: Christian site’s ban on ‘G’ word sends Homosexual to Olympics (washingtonpost.com)
* June 30, 2008: American Family Association’s search/replace function works perfectly (scienceblogs.com)
“Jon Stewart has never been 100% liberal,” Media Research Center president Brent Bozell tells Daniel Libit. “He is 98 percent liberal. Every once in a while there’s something that strikes him as so obvious that as a satirist he has to say something about it.” The Daily Show” host’s attacks on Harry Reid and Rahm Emanuel “have been warmly received by conservative leaders and Republican strategists,” writes Libit.
A memo from Wall Street Journal executive editor, online Alan Murray says the paper is launching a video blog “powered entirely by clips from our journalists.” The WSJ WorldStream site goes live later this month.
Murray tells colleagues:
Those of you who’ve been equipped and trained to shoot iPhone video – and there are now hundreds of you – will be able to upload clips of up to 45 seconds directly to the stream. An editor will review the clips before they are posted. Once in the stream, they can be embedded in stories, used on live shows, used in video packages, or viewed and shared in the blog format.
Read the memo after the jump. Read More
Former Rocky Mountain News reporter and editor Gil Rudawsky wasn’t sure what he was going to do after his newspaper folded, “but I did know for sure that I was not going to stay in journalism,” he writes.
I knew all too well that the profession was going to continue to hemorrhage, and I didn’t want to relive the experience. One of my friends in the newsroom the day the presses stopped has worked at four newspapers since then.
Rudowsky went into PR, and “as it turns out, my skills were perfectly suited for this world, particularly crisis communications and reputation management. Years in a newsroom covering elections, scandals, tragedies, and natural disasters gave me keen insight into coming up with response strategies and, most importantly, keeping a cool head under fire. …
“Having seen both sides, PR has shown me the light, and I’m a true believer in how we can help our clients manage issues and get their sides of the story fairly told. There’s value in what we do.”
I can’t help but view these real-estate changes as a metaphor for the overall role of newspapers in our society. They once were commanding civic institutions, owned by local businesspeople who expressed their pride and influence by constructing grand buildings to house their media properties.
Now they’re pieces of far-flung corporate empires, staggered by recession and rapid transformation in their industry, run by absentee owners focused on the bottom line above all else. No longer a symbol of local power and influence, the newspaper building is merely an economic asset on a balance sheet, to be disposed of when it becomes a drain on profits.
New York University’s “Undercover Reporting” database chronicles undercover journalism dating back to the 1800s. “Much of this material has long been buried in microfilm in individual libraries and thus very difficult to retrieve,” says NYU journalism professor Brooke Kroeger, who spearheaded the project. “Most digitized newspaper archives do not go back past the 1980s or 1990s and even for those that do, it’s difficult to search without exact details of the piece you are seeking.”
Read the press release after the jump.
Even if Barclays analyst Kannan Venkateshwar’s projections are right, “the digital subscription story won’t solve all of the Times’ problems,” writes Peter Kafka. “For starters, each digital customer generates much less revenue than a print customer: The digital sub pays around $220 a year for the Times, vs. approximately $730 for the paper-and-ink version.”