This year has given us simply too many worthy contenders for FAIR’s annual P.U.-litzers–recognizing the stinkiest journalism of the year. A big part of the problem was that so many outlets were striving to distinguish themselves with especially awful coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement. So to note those lowlights, we bring you a special installment of P.U.-litzers: The OWS edition.

Read full story here.

Not one expressed an interest.

The result of partisan sentiment, as in he’s a Democrat and I’m Republican? On this so-called liberal campus on the Upper East side of Manhattan?Or, as in I’m a birther and he’s from Mars? One student in the feature writing class did use, subsequently, the official transcript of conference call but the article lacked vim and vigor though it was adequate.

I also was mildly surprised that the Hunter student publication, the Envoy, declined to participate (but I was really surprised by the Editor-in-Chief’s hissy snit/fit that was cited as the reasoning for the lack of participation).

I eventually regarded the decisions as commentary on the state of student journalism at Hunter. But before the assumption: In light of what I considered a major opportunity for student journalists, I tried to generate in the introductory reporting class a post mortem class discussion about news and news decision making and what’s important and, hopefully, learn what was on their minds. I queried my introductory news writing class, QMfE, “About 300 other student news publications participated, and I was just wondering why no one here saw the value of volunteering for what could be at the very least a really good portfolio piece.”

But blank stares and my sense that the Duh Imperative could be at work, subliminally, convinced me to move on.

Basic Reporting: 4A’s, 4B+’s, 2B’s, 1B-, 2CRs [credit for course], 2Fs.

The first drafts of the first writing assignment contained egregious errors so foul that I could have flunked all of them. I didn’t. The rewrites could have fitted on a bell curve ranging from tolerable to  poor.

Subsequently in the semester, one student whined about having to use the class wiki because she didn’t want to record her password for future use. Another was serially reprimanded for drinking water near her computer even through the F-consequences were in the class syllabus. [I really didn't want to resort to the F  but this semester serial violators will have to Pay the Piper.]

Another, 30, subsequently teared up because of the home work assignments: QMfE: “Are you going to flunk me? Are you going to flunk me?” AYGtFM Etcetera. Resentment was building – I hate the whining aloud – but I resisted primal urges and started holding hands. [There, there now. Just do the homework assignments and you can't fail]. Not this semester.

Feature Writing: 1A+, 1A, 1B+, 2Bs, 1C+, 2INCs [Incompletes].

Very talented Class. Very undisciplined students. One teary-eye episode. One snit fit, QMfE, “I’m not using the wiki,” snort, snort. Which changed to, after the primal warning, QMfE, “Yeah, duh. Wow. I love the wiki.” The A+ surprised me. But I was really surprised how the rest just sort of bummed out.

So, for the record: Many of my colleagues regard the students as not too bright and unworthy of their time. My take : Talented students, many undisciplined … and in a program that offers them little to be inspired about.

The Usual Suspects

The following was written on the WORD’s facebook page several days ago:

So, what do WORD friends think about the following? One of my students was directly warned about text messaging during my ethics class last semester. There were warnings to other students. And the warnings are spelled in the class syllabus. But she text nevertheless, and instead of flunking her, I told her in class she would lose one grade off her final grade for the violation. Her final grade was C.

I’ve been exploring the relevance of Social Media Networking after several students clued me in a few years ago. Read a few academic papers, read a lot of mainstream stuff and decided one way to explore was to engage. The post about texting in class was part of that. There were a few comments and then a student who was in the same class as the unidentified student, and who had signed on as a WORD facebook friend, and who had also had been penalized for text messaging, joined the discussion.

Her story provided a self-serving version. She didn’t write about what actually occurred in class. Her version made her look better than the actual scene of the disruption she caused when she jumped up in class, cell phone in hand and next to her cheek, and exclaimed aloud, an expletive, capturing the attention of, without exaggerating, everyone in class. Her classroom demeanor up until that moment had been ragged but the cellphone pushed the raggedness way over the line.

But let the facebook posts do the talking.

So, posted on the WORD facebook was this link of a YouTube anecdote: “Woman falls into fountain at mall while texting on her cell phone … [approaching 1.9 million-plus hits]: Link.

Also:

… and added was this message:

Two students whose final grades were reduced one grade because of text messaging in my class despite several warnings should view this as a metaphorical message about the inappropriateness of bovine messaging at the wrong time.

And Tricia Orlando posted this final post:

The plot thickens.

The other notified me that she was appealing her grade (which is not a bad strategy in a department with the most sordid grading scams at Hunter). But never mind that. Below is a metaphysical rejoinder to them about the perils of texting inappropriately.

Yes! She figuratively falls into the brink.

The battle in D:F/M over the direction of the journalism curriculum (reflecting the many conflicts of the internecine war of several years also ongoing in D:F/M) forced this writer into a publish or perish mode. This series is one of the results.

II) Journalism needs representation, just like film and media, on the P&B and P&C committee. And to be blunt: We need someone who understands journalism. We can talk of collegiality and collaboration but C&C can develop better with a sounder structure.

III) Regarding portfolios, I don’t believe adjuncts should be responsible for managing/editing/operating online or off-line publications for their students (unless they want to). I think the adjuncts should be responsible for students in their classes completing assignments that can be submitted for publication, which I believe can strongly prepare them for the second part of the sequence. I don’t think it’s a big deal that students completing the first semester of the news writing-basic reporting sequence (whatever we call it), in order to pass the course, have to have completed two or three articles to be submitted to a student publication. My students are required publish at least three. This publish or perish imperative has resulted in a solid tradition of student achievements.

I believe that should also occur in the second semester. In my reasoning, students need to have a good set of portfolios by their junior year. I would say 6 to 12 published pieces at a minimum. I’m talking about writing here but there are other media, such as podcasting and online broadcasting. However, I think that needs to be discussed.

Something I quickly observed requiring students to write for publication resulted in a strong demarcation between students who did the homework and those who refused.

IV) One of my main gripes has been – under two chairs with significant support from the P&Bs – the spurious portrayal of the WORD as department property or its portrayal  as a reflection of what the department does or does for its students while at the same time F/M shunned the mechanism that makes it work, said mechanism being requiring students to write for publication. This particular practice of the department’s tradition of smoke & mirrors needs to be trashed. Either we make this portfolio process a serious part of the curriculum or we leave it to individual instructors to decide what they want to do and support them – not undermine them.

End of Part 3

"Students in important areas of learning are more sophisticated and savvy than Colleagues give them credit. Are my Colleagues really that obstinate about teaching and learning?

I) D:F/M needs a course that serves as a portal for journalism just like the ones for media and film. That is, to major and to take classes in the department, students must take a portal class. I’ve reviewed Media 180 as taught by Bob Stanley and Peter Parisi. It has been for years the required course for students interested in majoring in media and taking J- classes.

I proposed a long time ago that there should be a another portal class. Without going into detail, two Colleagues sabotaged a good idea, substituting  this course, Journalism and Society, an elective class which is not portal and is basically a media course posing as a journalism class. It lacks breadth and the first two de-emphasize journalism way too much.

Statements at the last meeting that journalism was essentially relegated to one lecture in a 15-week semester because the profession is regarded with contempt and is going out of business (I guess that means Democracy, too), is savagely revealing of the level of thinking in F/M regarding journalism. That is, the level of thinking has lacked the critical and intellectual depth that I’ve heard colleagues say that they want in the curriculum. So: I strongly suggest a portal level “Journalism and Mass Media” or  “Journalism and Mass Communication” with the emphasis on journalism (without ignoring its interconnections/workings with film, advertising, public relations and other forms of media).

Students should come into the news writing courses with some advanced knowledge that include such topics and issues as Community Journalism, Citizen Journalism and the role of weeklies, especially in New York City, from the corporate-own chains, like the “recent” Murdoch acquisitions, to the independents and free ones. Students should also have some awareness of ethnic/immigrant news publications and issues as well as evolving forms of journalism, such as blogging and video-blogging and some students would argue that the social networking sites are journalistic (I don’t think so but they do and, who knows, such sites might morph into a real journalism form).

Some colleagues were involved in the recent Grassroots Media Conference but except for one course, that’s Professor Stein’s, I don’t see anything from that conference reflected in F/M curriculum. I’m not saying that it should be or shouldn’t be though in a J/Mass Com class it could be.

Students should be aware of trade publications (AKA business-to-business media), newsletters, etcetera. Neighborhood cable TV access channels are very progressive and have journalistic programming but are in no way on the radar of department curriculum as they should be in terms of what role they play in NYC and what roles they can play in helping students prepare for internships and jobs.

I’ve left out a lot but not so much that an introductory course couldn’t accommodate. And, yes, the portal class should address the crisis in journalism which was so poorly articulated in our last [faculty] meeting.

End of Part 2

The battle in D:F/M over the direction of  the journalism curriculum (reflecting the many conflicts of the internecine war of several years also ongoing in D:F/M) forced me into a publish or perish mode. This post is one of the results.

I know from spending time at the Poynter Institute, visiting the McCormick Foundation, being involved with numerous projects and activities of  New America Media, the New York Times Foundation, New York Community Media Alliance, the Ford Foundation, and so many more other activities, and reviewing studies and proposals and engaging in forums and discussions  – I engage more than any other Colleague in my department if not at the College – that the discussions and battles and intrigue resonating and burning in D:F/M reflect in some ways what is going on in the business and profession at large.

I’ve also been re-reading The Reconstruction of American Journalism by Leonard Downie Jr. and Michael Schudson. It was released in October, 2009. And I’m planning to use it in my journalism ethics and responsibility class this semester.

Other college and university programs are probably wrestling with this issue of burgeoning technological change but most, I am assuming, eschew the maniacal internecine struggles that threaten students’ education. My Colleagues are just too cavalier about the curriculum.

So, I’m posting here a draft of an opinion that was written in Spring, 2009, but for reasons I can’t recall was never disseminated in my department – or at least it appears it was never sent – though many of the themes and topics have been circulated  by me for years. Now, that my department is on the verge of voting on curriculum changes that I’ve been saying for a long, long time are antediluvian and effete that I have made clear that I will not support when it comes to a vote, I am publishing here one of what I call an A Cassandra Moment.

This is the crux of the issue. The Powers That Be in D:F/M have been flummoxed by the burgeoning technology. The students enrolling in D:F/M classes, however, are media savvy, that is, they have been using media extensively well before they ever enrolled in our classes. They write. They use photographs. They produce videos. They do a lot more.

Flummoxed, D:F/M Colleagues have opted not to address the change happening rapidly before their eyes.

End of Part 1

The battle in D:F/M over the direction of  the journalism curriculum (reflecting the many conflicts of the internecine war of several years also ongoing in D:F/M) forced me into a publish or perish mode. This post is one of the results.

I know from spending time at the Poynter Institute, visiting the McCormick Foundation, being involved with numerous projects and activities of  New America Media, the New York Times Foundation, New York Community Media Alliance, the Ford Foundation, and so many more other activities, and reviewing studies and proposals and engaging in forums and discussions  – I engage more than any other Colleague in my department if not at the College – that the discussions and battles and intrigue resonating and burning in D:F/M reflect in some ways what is going on in the business and profession at large.

I’ve also been re-reading The Reconstruction of American Journalism by Leonard Downie Jr. and Michael Schudson. It was released in October, 2009. And I’m planning to use it in my journalism ethics and responsibility class this semester.

Other college and university programs are probably wrestling with this issue of burgeoning technological change but most, I am assuming, eschew the maniacal internecine struggles that threaten students’ education. My Colleagues are just too cavalier about the curriculum.

So, I’m posting here a draft of an opinion that was written in Spring, 2009, but for reasons I can’t recall was never disseminated in my department – or at least it appears it was never sent – though many of the themes and topics have been circulated  by me for years. Now, that my department is on the verge of voting on curriculum changes that I’ve been saying for a long, long time are antediluvian and effete that I have made clear that I will not support when it comes to a vote, I am publishing here one of what I call an A Cassandra Moment.

This is the crux of the issue. The Powers That Be in D:F/M have been flummoxed by the burgeoning technology. The students enrolling in D:F/M classes, however, are media savvy, that is, they have been using media extensively well before they ever enrolled in our classes. They write. They use photographs. They produce videos. They do a lot more.

Flummoxed, D:F/M Colleagues have opted for not to address the change happening rapidly before their eyes.

So …

I) D:F/M needs a course that serves as a portal for journalism just like the ones for media and film. That is, to major and to take classes in the department, students must take a portal class. I’ve reviewed Media 180 as taught by Bob Stanley and Peter Parisi. It has been for years the required course for students interested in majoring in media and taking J- classes. I proposed a long time ago that there should be a another portal class. Without going into detail, two Colleagues sabotaged a good idea, substituting  this course, Journalism and Society , an elective class which is not portal and is basically a course about media posing as a journalism class. It seriously lacks breadth and the first two de-emphasize journalism way too much.

Statements at the last meeting that journalism was essentially relegated to one lecture in a 15-week semester because the profession is regarded with contempt and is going out of business (I guess that means Democracy, too), is savagely revealing of the level of thinking in F/M regarding journalism. That is, the level of thinking has lacked the critical and intellectual depth that I’ve heard colleagues say that they want in the curriculum. So: I strongly suggest a portal level “Journalism and Mass Media” or  “Journalism and Mass Communication” with the emphasis on journalism (without ignoring its interconnections/workings with film, advertising, public relations and other forms of media).

Students should come into the news writing courses with some advanced knowledge that include such topics and issues as Community Journalism, Citizen Journalism and the role of weeklies, especially in New York City, from the corporate-own chains, like the “recent” Murdoch acquisitions, to the independents and free ones. Students should also have some awareness of ethnic/immigrant news publications and issues as well as evolving forms of journalism, such as blogging and video-blogging and some students would argue that the social networking sites are journalistic (I don’t think so but they do and, who knows, such sites might morph into a real journalism form).

Some colleagues were involved in the recent Grassroots Media Conference but except for one course, that’s Professor Stein’s, I don’t see anything from that conference reflected in F/M curriculum. I’m not saying that it should be or shouldn’t be though in a J/Mass Com class it could be.

Students should be aware of trade publications (AKA business-to-business media), newsletters, etcetera. Neighborhood cable TV access channels are very progressive and have journalistic programming but are in no way on the radar of department curriculum as they should be in terms of what role they play in NYC and what roles they can play in helping students prepare for internships and jobs.

I’ve left out a lot but not so much that an introductory course couldn’t accommodate. And, yes, the portal class should address the crisis in journalism which was so poorly articulated in our last [faculty] meeting.

II) Journalism needs representation, just like film and media, on the P&B and P&C committee. And to be blunt: We need someone who understands journalism. We can talk of collegiality and collaboration but C&C can develop better with a sounder structure.

III) Regarding portfolios, I don’t believe adjuncts should be responsible for managing/editing/operating online or off-line publications for their students. I think the adjuncts should be responsible for students in their classes completing assignments that can be submitted for publication, which I believe can strongly prepare them for the second part of the sequence. I don’t think it’s a big deal that students competing the first semester of the news writing-basic reporting sequence (whatever we call it), in order to pass the course, have to have completed two or three articles to be submitted to a student publication (My students are required publish at least three).

I believe that should also occur in the second semester. In my reasoning, students need to have a good set of portfolios by their junior year. I would say 6 to 12 published pieces at a minimum. I’m talking about writing here but there are other media, such as podcasting and online broadcasting. However, I think that needs to be discussed.

Something I quickly observed requiring students to write for publication resulted in a strong demarcation between students who did the homework and those who refused.

IV) One of my main gripes has been – under two chairs with significant support from the P&Bs – the spurious portrayal of the WORD as department property or its portrayal  as a reflection of what the department does or does for its students while at the same time F/M shunned the mechanism that makes it work, said mechanism being requiring students to write for publication. This particular practice of the department’s tradition of smoke & mirrors needs to be trashed. Either we make this portfolio process a serious part of the curriculum or we leave it to individual instructors to decide what they want to do and support them – not undermine them.

Hunter College PSC Chapter Chair

V) I believe the benefits of the former – required portfolio development – can make the department look good (the chairs and the P&Bs obviously believed that or there wouldn’t have been the kind of interference  that has been ongoing for years. I don’t need to address that in depth here. But reserve the right, so to speak, to address it later in a fashion of my choosing. Portfolio developmentlmost definitely can make our students more competitive in the intern-ship, job, grad school market. And I believe it can be done without increasing instructors’ burdens, significanlty, if we developed the news writing sequence. But the adjuncts will have to be seriously involved and supported.

VI) We need to do something about broadcast journalism even if only on a minimal level. The department has resisted for years having students develop broadcast portfolio experience  but one or two instructors – such as the adjunct Mike Cokkinos – has had students in his class producing news-type shows that were broadcast on CUNY-TV. I can’t recall accurate the number produced in a semester but it definitely was not more than 3. Broadcast journalism is in a limbo. The department has TV production but I’m not sure if that’s in media or film but it should be in journalism. I have other ideas for discussion.

VII) I want to take the WORD to the next level of development, making it more interactive for student involvement and more of a medium for disseminating news and information, and I also want to explore ad revenue. Because the WORD has been on line for more than seven years, it has a modest online presence and I am constantly getting requests about advertising. That means a significant upgrade should be considered. I also think we should be discussing the concept of journalism labs, especially if students are involved in producing content for disseminating news and information.

VIII) Students have been complaining for years that the so-called analytical, theoretical courses in media studies are redundant. We need to be aware of this.

All advisements and enlightenments and warnings and caveats delivered with deliberation: F for the class after an initial warning. Yet, when it came time for the big F, I chickened out and, instead, took off one grade of the final grade. Two students this semester.

Both, of course, provided cheesy excuses, like the one below: 6:48-6:50? Not my recollection. More like smirking and gee whiz and all shucks. A mid 20s student.

Date: Fri Dec 31 13:31:38 EST 2010
From: [Student Name, email blocked out]
To: gmorris@hunter.cuny.edu

Dear Professor,
I find this to be completely disheartening. I worked hard in your class, I did what you asked for. I was on my cellphone once, at 6:48 when the class ended at 6:50, forwarding out a work email. I take late classes because I have a job, that has deadlines. I have a family also, with external factors that are private and that you as a person should understand. I am not here to give you some sob story, I took the fact that you called me out in front of a dozen students with integrity. I didn’t make up some illegitimate excuse as to why I had it out, I apologized. I didn’t dare to take out my cellphone in your classroom again, I was cautious about that. I studied hard for several days for your final, trying to turn around my other grades (one of which was an assignment that I did poorly on that you called the first draft, which made me assume that in the case that I didn’t quite understand your assignment I would have the chance to redo it). And an entire grade was taken off for a cellphone incident, for which I apologized for and made sure never happened again? I have been a student for 18+ years, I have yet to ever have a problem with a professor. I can’t believe that I got so severally penalized for such an incident, especially when you saw how hard I worked in your class after that. I am not asking for your sympathy just your understanding. I really wish that you could reconsider your decision.

So: She obviously imagined at the time of the incident that I wasn’t going through what had been announced about her in front of the class. She was dishonest in her plea (above). Left out that she had been warned before. That she had borne witnesses to others being warned. Nevertheless, she didn’t cry. Didn’t shout epithets. Didn’t curse.

Etcetera.

One of his latest:

I feel some sympathy for Obama trying to figure how to cope what almost seems to be a new major problem each day.

To run down the list:

The rest is here.