WQUN's Paul Janensch, who teaches journalism at Quinnipiac University, presents a serviceable piece about media mistakes in 2004. Janenesch has a classically handsome, Kevin Phillips -like voice that affords his pronouncements aural authority.
But though "Media Mea Culpas Encouraging Sign" addresses the ear with a neat vocal envelope, the card inside plucks no heartstrings – it's more annotation than commentary.
The generic intro "The media itself made news a lot this year. Media commentator Paul Janensch says the news was both a (sic?) good and bad (sic?)." doesn't really give the piece enough legs to blast out of the starting blocks.
And in closing, the "On the one hand, on the other hand" Solomonic tone (Yes, it was bad that important news organizations made serious mistakes, but it was good that they ultimately were willing to undergo an assessment of what they had done...) and "Eat your peas" admonitions (Wouldn't it be nice if government, corporations, unions, universities, hospitals, and other major institutions felt a similar accountability to the public?) seem products of a historical print editorial style that sounds dusty and flat.
I'd like to hear more of Prof Janensch's voice and learn more of his media criticism insights. If the approach is essentially factual analysis, a better vehicle might be a short four-to-five minute investigative journalism feature that can provide a more detailed and deeper exegesis. Alternately, I'd be just as happy if Prof Janensch's would fire away with his real opinions and emotions rather than smolder around the edges.
The cases he cites, from USA Today, New York Times, Washington Post, and CBS Television represent clear and deplorable derelictions of duty to the American people by the Fourth Estate. They can provoke only true outrage – not mere tut-tutting – from journalists and citizens alike.
Review of Media Mea Culpas Encouraging Sign
Geo Beach
Posted on December 31, 2004 at 05:24 PM
WQUN's Paul Janensch, who teaches journalism at Quinnipiac University, presents a serviceable piece about media mistakes in 2004. Janenesch has a classically handsome, Kevin Phillips -like voice that affords his pronouncements aural authority.
But though "Media Mea Culpas Encouraging Sign" addresses the ear with a neat vocal envelope, the card inside plucks no heartstrings – it's more annotation than commentary.
The generic intro "The media itself made news a lot this year. Media commentator Paul Janensch says the news was both a (sic?) good and bad (sic?)." doesn't really give the piece enough legs to blast out of the starting blocks.
And in closing, the "On the one hand, on the other hand" Solomonic tone (Yes, it was bad that important news organizations made serious mistakes, but it was good that they ultimately were willing to undergo an assessment of what they had done...) and "Eat your peas" admonitions (Wouldn't it be nice if government, corporations, unions, universities, hospitals, and other major institutions felt a similar accountability to the public?) seem products of a historical print editorial style that sounds dusty and flat.
I'd like to hear more of Prof Janensch's voice and learn more of his media criticism insights. If the approach is essentially factual analysis, a better vehicle might be a short four-to-five minute investigative journalism feature that can provide a more detailed and deeper exegesis. Alternately, I'd be just as happy if Prof Janensch's would fire away with his real opinions and emotions rather than smolder around the edges.
The cases he cites, from USA Today, New York Times, Washington Post, and CBS Television represent clear and deplorable derelictions of duty to the American people by the Fourth Estate. They can provoke only true outrage – not mere tut-tutting – from journalists and citizens alike.