:: LNR Journalism ::

Sasha Issenberg: Why campaign reporters are behind the curve

New York Times :: The reality about horse-race journalism is far more embarrassing to the press and ought to be just as disappointing to the readers who consume our reporting. The truth is that we aren’t even that good at covering the horse race. If the 2012 campaign has been any indication, journalists remain unable to keep up with the machinations of modern campaigns, and things are likely only to get worse.

An essay by Sasha Issenberg, campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com

'Reporting live: From Tumblr': A meta-blog with an audience growing a newsroom

Buzzfeed :: Of the estimated thousands of journalists at the Republican National Convention, these people stand out. For one, they're not political reporters in the traditional sense of the term. And, though this is less of a novelty than it may seem, they're posting exclusively to Tumblr. They're also posting for Tumblr, as part of one the site's early forays into original journalism.

[John Herrman:] The world's biggest GIF repository grows a political newsroom.

Tumblr's political newsroom - A report by John Herrman, www.buzzfeed.com

"Tumbling the Conventions" - election.tumblr.com

You fact-check? We don't care, if media says we lie.

Dear media critics: OK, entire news media called Romney's welfare attack a lie. Campaign still pushing it. Now what?

— David S. Bernstein (@dbernstein) August 22, 2012

Pressthink :: "You’re not entitled to your own facts” vs. That’s your opinion. Kiss my ad. --- Suppose there arose on the political scene a practical caucus for the opposite view. We are entitled to our own facts, and we will show you what we think of your attempt to “check” us. If that happened, would the press know what to do?

[Jay Rosen tweeted:] This week, one campaign said: "We defy the fact checkers. Your move, journalists." Would the press act? I blogged it.

Thoughts by Jay Rosen, pressthink.org

'Quote approval' turns press from watchdog to lapdog

First Amendment Center :: Big-time news outlets are reported to have caved into pressure both from the White House and the Mitt Romney campaign, agreeing to get approval of quotes from the candidates — and sometimes even the spokesmen for the candidates – before publishing interview articles.

[Gene Policinski:] ... if politicians don’t like those rules, then they don’t get into the stories. In Washington, if no other place, there’s always a way to get the story even if the principal subject isn’t speaking, even if not as quickly or easily.

An opinion piece by Gene Policinski, www.firstamendmentcenter.org

We don't print your edited quote.

New York Times :: National Journal said it would ban the use of quotations that had been massaged or manipulated by its sources, joining a growing chorus of news organizations that are objecting to a practice that has become increasingly common in political journalism.

A report by Jeremy W. Peters, www.nytimes.com

On The Media: 'May I use this quote?'

On The Media :: Last Monday, Jeremy W. Peters' article on the front page of The New York Times opened up a conversation about the surprisingly common practice of 'quote approval' - wherein journalists send quotes back to campaign members and government officials after interviews for approval.

Listen to the audio here Host: Bob Garfield, www.onthemedia.org

HT: Bruce Orcutt, here:

@StKonrath just finished listening to a story on this same topic on NPR's "On The Media" so was already mulling this over.

— Bruce Orcutt (@cherveny) July 22, 2012

Is quote approval ethical? No one ever said these things were easy

The Observer | Guardian :: The New York Times caused a furore by revealing it allowed presidential campaign aides to polish up candidates' quotes. But then, doesn't clarity improve the debate?

An opinion piece by Peter Preston, www.guardian.co.uk

HT: Jeff Jarvis, here:

I should have asked what the Guardian's policy is re quote approval given a former editor's whitewashing. @arusbridger? guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jul…

— Jeff Jarvis (@jeffjarvis) July 21, 2012

Jakarta Votes: Can social media analytics offer more insights than pollsters?

Tech In Asia :: Quick count results of Jakarta’s governor election have surprised many conventional pollsters as it differs so much from their own survey results from before the actual election. Based on news released by Centro One and Detik, I compiled a comparison of pre-election survey results and quick count results conducted by three popular pollsters in Indonesia.

A report by Iqbal Farabi, www.techinasia.com

Can Twitter matter? - Twitter could swing presidential vote in Pennsylvania

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette :: Nowhere is it fiercer than in Pennsylvania. The commonwealth has lost 45 percent of its electoral clout since 1932, and it hasn't backed a GOP presidential candidate since 1988. But in a year when every electoral vote is golden, Republicans swear it's in play and Democrats are fighting as if it is. In New Jersey, which is not considered a swing state, Twitter is but one among many media. In Pennsylvania, swinging like crazy, Twitter might be crucial.

As Kirsten Kukowski, spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, says, Twitter "has become how news gets started, and how that news is amplified."

[John Timpane:] Can Twitter matter? - The Republican and Democratic parties think so.

Twitter and political campaigns - Continue to read here John Timpane, www.post-gazette.com

The chronic journalistic malady, passivity, when it comes to framing issue stories

Columbia Journalism Review :: As we sipped red wine in Washington last week, Republican pollster David Winston suddenly asked me, “Why doesn’t the media write more about issues that are of central concern to the voters? Why don’t they write more about candidate differences and the implications for the country? Instead we get a litany of process pieces with issues as a sideshow.” When pollsters—yes, pollsters—start sounding like high-minded press critics, it’s a sign that horse-race hysteria has grown to absurd levels.

[Walter Shapiro:] Why is ‘issue coverage’ so boring—and often wrong?

Continue to read Walter Shapiro, www.cjr.org