Comments on: The AJC proves Sugg right

By: Dale

Dale — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:24:39 +0000

Now that’s funny.

I think it’s cool your Dad’s co-workers read your work.

By: Andisheh Nouraee

Andisheh Nouraee — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:02:57 +0000

I miss that picture.

My dad made me switch. He was tired of explaining to his co-workers.

By: Dale

Dale — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:42:40 +0000

I know, but I refer to you in the feminine as a tribute to your headscarf photo in days past .

By: Andisheh Nouraee

Andisheh Nouraee — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:34:40 +0000

You’re welcome.

I’m not shocked that celebrity news is on their Most Popular list. I’m shocked that enough people know/care about El De Barge to have clicked on it.

BTW — It’s Andy.

By: Dale

Dale — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:56:47 +0000

Thank you Andi (another terriffic writer at CL and NOT at AJC) for helping (unknowingly?) with my point hahahahahaha

From Fresh Loaf;

Slow news week?
August 30th, 2007 by Andisheh Nouraee in Hot Off The Press
Whatâ€™s the definition of â€œslow news weekâ€?

The arrest of singer El DeBarge is the second most popular news story at AJC.com.

I wonder whoâ€™s

By: Dale

Dale — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:09:38 +0000

Sure good investigative reporting sells newspapers. That is why so many great investigative reporters work for the AJC, USA Today, etc. My opinion is that, unfortunately, as more Americans get their news from Entertainment Tonight, we see papers and broadcast news becoming more like ET to attempt competition.

I find good investigative reporters in places like CL than in the majors. Mara and Sugg for instance.

I think that is because of the readership. I think CL readers are more hungry intellectually and think more critically than AJC readers. Not scientific I know, but the anecdotal evidence is pretty overwhelming that either AJC readers are not that bright or the editors think the readers are not very bright.

By: John F. Sugg

John F. Sugg — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:26:46 +0000

You’ll be proud of me, Sellout. When I was at our Tampa paper, then called the Weekly Planet, we stripped a banner during all of the O.J. stuff that proclaimed: Not one word about O.J. inside, or something like that. We got a lot of calls and letters saying thanks.

I recall that when Gloria Estefan was injured in a car wreck, I counted more than two dozen Miami Herald reporters working on the story (I believe the actual number was 27). The Herald had drawings of her spine, every aspect of her life, etc. Yet, when the City of Miami went bankrupt, the Herald had no reporters covering City Hall — that old boring government stuff no one wants to read. The Herald learned the story by seeing it on TV news.

By: Sellout

Sellout — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:03:21 +0000

John — we agree on the celebrity stuff. If I have to read about Lindsay Lohan one more time I’M gonna end up in rehab! It’s not that there isn’t a place for that in the newspaper, but it’s way out of whack.

And Dale, I believe that hard-nosed investigative stories can sell newspapers. I’ve seen it happen!

Sugg, if you write about Lindsay Lohan, I’m dropping my subscription to CL. Oh, wait….

By: John F. Sugg

John F. Sugg — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:41:09 +0000

Mr. Sellout, sir, no dispute that the AJC has abandoned the field. And maybe you can argue that the media over-indulges (an under-statement) on Paris and Lindsay because that’s what the public wants (although Pew did a recent poll that indicates otherwise). A more accurate read is that the media push celebrity news, whether heiresses gone wild or quarterbacks gone bad, because it’s cheap and largely risk-free. That it’s also intellectually calorie-free no longer matters to the media lords. In some cases, there may be deeper motives. I did a column several years back based on a memo leaked to me. It was sent to Fox stations by a consultant, and urged a lot of crime news because that jacked up viewers’ emotions (the consultant highly recommended, for example, stories on gays having sex in public places because that produced “outrage”). The reason that the consultant wanted an emotional response was because highly excited people were more inclined to respond to advertising. Heat the viewers up with crime news, and they’re more likely to rush out for a Big Mac.

I don’t think that’s why the AJC overplays Vick. They’re just not that smart of sophisticated. But Vick news is cheap (after all, the AJC would seldom, if ever nowadays, invest in investigative reporting other than that involving state agencies, which are safe turf). And because it is, as you argue, “local,” that justifies endless amounts of overplay.

And that’s a whole lot safer than taking an opportunity with Gonzo to explore just how much our liberties have been eroded. With Gonzo (and Rove and Cheney) charting the way, Bush has crossed his own Rubicon from republic to empire. And due to an apathetic, lazy press, many in America still fail to grasp in the jeopardy we’re in.

The article and timeline in the AJC could hardly be called incisive. It was a quick skim over the history, a few predictable comments pro and con, and little on the damage done by Gonzo, from the torture memo to bolstering the Big Brother concept (at least as interpreted by Bush/Cheney/Gonzales/et al) of the unitary executive.

Dale, why people care is the more relevant question. If people are fed an addictive concoction of fluff, celeb news, crime etc., that’s what they’ll want, and that’s why we have such a dumbed down nation.

Oh, BTW, my column next week is on Vick, not Gonzo. Hey, we all have to move newspapers.

By: Dale

Dale — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:43:39 +0000

While you two are debating how many J school grads can spin on the head of a needle, a question for you…..

Even though they do an increasingly bad job at it, the AJC is in businesss to sell papers….

They sell most of them in Atlanta……

Who do you think more Atlantans care about, Vick or Gonzalez?

I’ll be over here if you need any more completely obvious things explained to you.