Updating Three Previous Blogs
Some interesting developments in previous blog topics Katie Couric, greed in higher education and the smoking ban on the Cape Regional Medical Center “campus.”
As usual, your comments would be appreciated.
I had wondered at Couric’s relative lack of success anchoring the CBS Evening News and at my own reluctance to watch her.
That was months ago.
CBS continues in third place and now there are hints that Katie is herself dissatisfied and could move on.
In a New York Magazine interview, she said the show’s “biggest mistake” had been “trying new things,” most of which were subsequently abandoned, and the return to a “more traditional broadcast” made the job “less appealing” to her.
As for my own 6:30 p.m. viewing, should you care, as a news junkie, I am intrigued at the toe-to-toe (neck and neck?) battle between ABC’s Charles Gibson, definitely old school, and NBC’s Brian Williams for first place.
I am more familiar with and trusting of NBC’s correspondents in the trenches, but ABC is coming up with more exclusive stories. As a result, I switch back and forth.
Does trusting your reporter, whether on TV or in your local paper, mean much to you? Do exclusive stories?
The latest higher education disappointment occurred at Eastern Michigan University where the administration lied to the news media and, more important, to the parents of a female student who was raped and killed. They said there was no fowl play. Then police arrested a suspect and it all came out.
Three administrators, including the president, were forced to resign. How sad that officials in a position of trust would try to cover up a murder to spare their university’s reputation.
Finally, I wrote when about the medical center’s “smoke-free campus” that the policy would be “as good as its enforcement.”
I regret to say the policy has been little-publicized and I have seen no signs of enforcement, and numerous signs of lack of enforcement.
posted by Joe Zelnik @ 11:59 AM
6 Comments
6 Comments:
First: I stumbled upon your blog and found the post interesting; you're concerned with topics that most people are not.
Second: I have no credentials to speak of so I hope that no "flame war" ensues.
Third: I dislike the mass media. I think low of it. My reasons are rather simple. The media is supposed to be truly objective and take no sides whether they be liberal of conservative. This is never the case. Almost all news agencies are liberal excepting Fox. Because of this, I care little about who the reporter(s) is. I focus more on the content and try to sift through the bullsh--. For my own personal news I choose to read it online. I frequent Fox for mainstream news, BBC for international news, Slashdot for geeky news.
Fourth: I hate smoking bans. This has little to do with my own personal habits and more to do with the socio political points of the issue. A business owner should be able to choose whether or not he or she will allow smoking in his or her establishment. This choice will largely depend upon who the owners main customers are. A public smoking ban will keep many smokers from said place of business. Smoking free campuses will deter many smokers from attending said school. Seeing as a medical school wants to enforce a smoking ban... that makes sense, but I still disagree. As for the rest of your post regarding educational institutions... I understand the faculty's standpoint but agree that their choice of action was completely wrong.
Thank you for commenting. Since you are not a "local," you would not know that the Cape May Medical Center, despite its use of the word "campus ," is a hospital, not a school. Look to earlier blogs for the whole smoking ban issue and the interesting comments.
Ditto re: the mass media opinion. Why would any objective being watch NBC, CBS or ABC for news? You cannot possibly be that naive.
I try to peruse Christian Science Monitor, Wall Street Journal, Phila. Inq. Phila. Daily News and NY Times online. As was said, you have to sift through the propaganda and read between the lines. That's not how hard reporting is supposed to be.
Any fool can also see that the "smoking ban" is not about health as much as it is about freedom(s).
alright, I will do so. Though I would have to say that even though I am strongly opposed to smoking bans... no one should smoke at hospitals. Some people have severe medical issues that would be worsened by exposure.
It thrills my heart to see that there are at least two other people in the world who know that the media must be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism and scrutinized with a suspicious mind, always questioning the sources, the motives, the agendas, etc.
I find it interesting that no one has commented on the college cover-up. I think this is because your responses so far have come from people who are not naive, and they probably wonder (as I do) why you are so shocked by behavior that happens every single day. While not acceptable or excusable, it is also not shocking or even surprising. Think of Natalee Holloway and Susan Negersmith -- two other girls whose tragic stories vibrate with a similar ring.
The smoking debate is bringing out ugliness in people. Your last blog resembled a Jerry Springer show. Smokers may feel the issue is about freedom, but -- as doktor bradvorkian states -- this particular ban is at a hospital, where one finds sick people. And everyone knows smoking is an unhealthy, sickening, deadly practice both to smokers and nonsmokers alike. Face it, smokers: Smoking on hospital grounds is indefensible. Get over it, and start obeying the rules.
If it was just about smoking in and around hospitals, few reasonable people would complain. The response was prompted by one blogger who opined that "smokers should be denied employment..."
That is something that neither smokers nor non-smokers should "get over."
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home