Sunday, September 12, 2010

Blast jolts newsroom with energy

Nevius
Chronicle columnist C.W. Nevius writes in his blog: "Thursday night was one of those moments that got a lot of us in the business in the first place. The San Bruno explosion was a horrific tragedy, but it was also a sudden, unexpected, breaking news story. And maybe I'm biased, but when I saw Friday morning's paper, with the huge color photo and headline, 'Inferno,' it felt like maybe old school media still had a place, and a story to tell. Reporters and editors dragged themselves into the newsroom Friday morning. Some of them had been at their desks until midnight and only had a few hours sleep. But they all talked about the energy in the newsroom Thursday night and the adrenaline rush it was to jump into a big story." [More]

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

the journalist's enthusiasm over the story while people burned to death is disgusting and unfathomable.

Robert B. Livingston said...

I am still wondering what exactly is the "new school media" as opposed to the "old school" Nevius describes.

When forced to go there, much of what I read at SFGate strikes me as propaganda and distraction, not news.

I read an article there today about how hatred of Muslims in the U.S. is becoming more inflamed even as it reiterated the unproven story that Muslim hijackers perpetrated the tragedy of 9/11.

(Bear me out even if you cannot agree with my assessment.)

What really rankled me was what I read reviewing the comments following the article which were mostly extremely vile and benighted. One respondent was named "Wakaju"-- Wackajew?. Another made a comment, one I agree with, that 9/11 was an "inside job" which drew a response, "have you seen the documentary that proves it is not so?" "Oh." was basically the first commenter's conclusion.

(It has been said that in the conflict of ideas truth emerges-- yet what ideas could approach truth from the chronically misinformed? The documentary mentioned has been thoroughly debunked, but one would never know so by reading the Chronicle.)

I cannot help concluding that the Chronicle, by design or culture, encourages and panders especially to a modern form of brownshirtism that flourishes when doors are closed to serious investigation and non-trivial debate.

Having read Nevius's ongoing poison-penned articles about the homeless in San Francisco, I cannot help concluding that he has himself been little more than a component of this encouragement and pandering.

Even so, I find it tragic to discover again and again, journalists like Nevius, who once having compromised their good talents with flawed enterprises,suddenly lamenting unfulfilled promises of their profession-- or pretending that the current state of affairs is a fluke.

The Chronicle doesn't care deeply about its "tools" and readers like me.

That should be clear to anyone who follows its ongoing upmanship against the welfare of its employees, the culture it engenders, including its growing reliance on demand media content.

Robert B. Livingston said...

I am still wondering what exactly is the "new school media" as opposed to the "old school" Nevius describes.

When forced to go there, much of what I read at SFGate strikes me as propaganda and distraction, not news.

I read an article there today about how hatred of Muslims in the U.S. is becoming more inflamed even as it reiterated the unproven story that Muslim hijackers perpetrated the tragedy of 9/11.

(Bear me out even if you cannot agree with my assessment.)

What really rankled me was what I read reviewing the comments following the article which were mostly extremely vile and benighted. One respondent was named "Wakaju"-- Wackajew?. Another made a comment, one I agree with, that 9/11 was an "inside job" which drew a response, "have you seen the documentary that proves it is not so?" "Oh." was basically the first commenter's conclusion.

(It has been said that in the conflict of ideas truth emerges-- yet what ideas could approach truth from the chronically misinformed?)

I cannot help concluding that the Chronicle, by design or culture, encourages and panders especially to a modern form of brownshirtism that flourishes when doors are closed to serious investigation and non-trivial debate.

Even so, I find it tragic to discover again and again, journalists like Nevius, who once having compromised their good talents with flawed enterprises,suddenly lament unfulfilled promises of their profession-- or pretending that the current state of affairs is a fluke.

The Chronicle doesn't care deeply about its "tools" and readers like me.

That should be clear to anyone who follows its ongoing upmanship against the welfare of its employees, the culture it engenders, including its growing reliance on demand media content.

Robert B. Livingston said...

I am still wondering what exactly is the "new school media" as opposed to the "old school" Nevius describes.

When forced to go there, much of what I read at SFGate strikes me as propaganda and distraction, not news.

I read an article there today about how hatred of Muslims in the U.S. is becoming more inflamed even as it reiterated the unproven story that Muslim hijackers perpetrated the tragedy of 9/11.

(Bear me out even if you cannot agree with my assessment.)

What really rankled me was what I read reviewing the comments following the article which were mostly extremely vile and benighted. One respondent was named "Wakaju"-- Wackajew?. Another made a comment, one I agree with, that 9/11 was an "inside job" which drew a response, "have you seen the documentary that proves it is not so?" "Oh." was basically the first commenter's conclusion.

(It has been said that in the conflict of ideas truth emerges-- yet what ideas could approach truth from the chronically misinformed?)

I cannot help concluding that the Chronicle, by design or culture, encourages and panders especially to a modern form of brownshirtism that flourishes when doors are closed to serious investigation and non-trivial debate.

Even so, I find it tragic to discover again and again, journalists like Nevius, who once having compromised their good talents with flawed enterprises,suddenly lament unfulfilled promises of their profession-- or pretending that the current state of affairs is a fluke.

The Chronicle doesn't care deeply about its "tools" and readers like me.

That should be clear to anyone who follows its ongoing upmanship against the welfare of its employees, the culture it engenders, including its growing reliance on demand media content.

Robert B. Livingston said...

I am still wondering what exactly is the "new school media" as opposed to the "old school" Nevius describes.

When forced to go there, much of what I read at SFGate strikes me as propaganda and distraction, not news.

I read an article there today about how hatred of Muslims in the U.S. is becoming more inflamed even as it reiterated the unproven story that Muslim hijackers perpetrated the tragedy of 9/11.

(Bear me out even if you cannot agree with my assessment.)

What really rankled me was what I read reviewing the comments following the article which were mostly extremely vile and benighted. One respondent was named "Wakaju"-- Wackajew?. Another made a comment, one I agree with, that 9/11 was an "inside job" which drew a response, "have you seen the documentary that proves it is not so?" "Oh." was basically the first commenter's conclusion.

(It has been said that in the conflict of ideas truth emerges-- yet what ideas could approach truth from the chronically misinformed?)

I cannot help concluding that the Chronicle, by design or culture, encourages and panders especially to a modern form of brownshirtism that flourishes when doors are closed to serious investigation and non-trivial debate.

Even so, I find it tragic to discover again and again, journalists like Nevius, who once having compromised their good talents with flawed enterprises,suddenly lament unfulfilled promises of their profession-- or pretending that the current state of affairs is a fluke.

The Chronicle doesn't care deeply about its "tools" and readers like me.

That should be clear to anyone who follows its ongoing upmanship against the welfare of its employees, the culture it engenders, including its growing reliance on demand media content.

Robert B. Livingston said...

When forced to go there, much of what I read at SFGate strikes me as propaganda and distraction, not news.

I read an article there today about how hatred of Muslims in the U.S. is becoming more inflamed even as it reiterated the unproven story that Muslim hijackers perpetrated the tragedy of 9/11.

(Bear me out even if you cannot agree with my assessment.)

What really rankled me was what I read reviewing the comments following the article which were mostly extremely vile and benighted. One respondent was named "Wakaju"-- Wackajew?. Another made a comment, one I agree with, that 9/11 was an "inside job" which drew a response, "have you seen the documentary that proves it is not so?" "Oh." was basically the first commenter's conclusion.

(It has been said that in the conflict of ideas truth emerges-- yet what ideas could approach truth from the chronically misinformed?)

I cannot help concluding that the Chronicle, by design or culture, encourages and panders especially to a modern form of brownshirtism that flourishes when doors are closed to serious investigation and non-trivial debate.

Even so, I find it tragic to discover again and again, journalists like Nevius, who once having compromised their good talents with flawed enterprises, suddenly lament unfulfilled promises of their profession-- or pretending that the current state of affairs is a fluke.

The Chronicle doesn't care deeply about its "tools" and readers like me.

That should be clear to anyone who follows its ongoing upmanship against the welfare of its employees, the culture it engenders, including its growing reliance on demand media content.

Fred Dodsworth said...

Nevis is what's wrong with journalism. There are a Hell of a lot of more important and exciting stories than San Bruno's Big Fire. Reporters and their editors and publishers need to wake up and smell the burning ruins of America. The story isn't one pipe, it's all of them!! The story isn't pipes at all, it's America's infrastructure, from schools to highways, from storm drains to electric grids. Reading Nevius's crap makes my blood boil. Reporters and editors and columnists and publishers need to cover their beats and love doing it. The energy for great journalism is there everyday if you care, and it shouldn't take a big fire to heat it up. No wonder folks don't care about the news anymore. There is NONE!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Fred sounds like one of these "advocacy journalists" who doesn't want to cover the news, but use the news to promote his opinions. The fire in San Bruno is definitely news. I agree that Nevius explained his feelings in an inappropriate way. People died, were seriously injured and lost their homes in this explosion and firestorm, so he shouldn't be talking about how it gives his newsroom a jolt of energy again. He should be striking a more somber tone. As for poor Fred, I don't want reporters telling me what to think about the news, I just want the news. Give me the facts and let me make up my own mind. If you want to opine, get a website so I can ignore your opinions, but don't mix them with the news.