4/29 - Chris Stone Summary, Shane Goodrich (Rowan McInnes)

Speaker: Chris Stone
Notes by Shane Goodrich
Discussion Leader: Rowan McKinnes

Rowan began his discussion asking the class if the hunger for news is currently greater than it has been in the past. Pat said that the hunger for news has grown now that you don’t have to go out of your way to get it. He said news is always at your fingertips with the Internet, using an example of Boston.com, which he uses as his homepage so he can always tell what is going on in his area.

Alyssa agreed with Pat, saying that she uses Facebook to send her friends news pieces. Another student said that technology makes it a lot easier to be specific for what kind of news you are interested in, rather than searching through a newspaper.

Rowan’s next question was based on Chris Stone’s belief that news is not dying, but that its delivery is changing. He asked if the class agreed with this idea. Aaron agreed with Stone, saying news will always be apart of our lives. He said that news delivery is probably going to change a lot in the next five to ten years, but it will never disappear.

Rowan brought up Chris Stone’s story on Alex Rodriguez, questioning if the public tend to believe whatever celebrities say because they are famous. One student said that he believed A-Rod’s story when he said the woman who wrote the story on his steroid use was stalking him. He said that it’s common for a celebrity to try to discredit the journalist who is writing stories that demean his or her character. Jesse agreed that people often blindly agree with celebrities, but said it is the job of a good investigative reporter to check if the celebrity’s story is factual. Another student said that she does not always agree with putting public figures in the news, like the huge buzz over Michael Phelps smoking marijuana.

Rowan questioned if the athletes salaries are the reason for allegations, some of which have been false. One student said that it makes the public feel less sorry for athletes because of the money they make. Rowan said he felt bad for A-Rod in his press conference, pointing out that he is still a human being, despite his large salary. Another student pointed out that A-Rod was cheating and should be exposed. He said that A-Rod, Bryant, and Phelps’ situations are all different and should be reported on differently. He followed up, saying A-Rod deserved to be called out. Alyssa said that athletes often feel they are above the law and try to see how far they can push the limits. She said that crimes like Michael Vick’s should be exposed. Aaron pointed out that steroids were not illegal at the time A-Rod was using them. He said allegations from the past, mixed with today’s emotions, makes situations look worse than they are.

Rowan thought it was unfair that players from the list of 104 remain anonymous while A-Rod is the only player brought to the public eye. A student said that there is no player bigger than A-Rod in baseball currently. He pointed out that he will break most batting records and probably be accepted in the Hall of Fame, despite being remembered for taking steroids during the 2003 season. Erin said a monumental story, like Sports Illustrated’s A-Rod story, is like a journalist’s steroid. She said journalism is a business, and a story of that magnitude can up a journalist’s name.

Pat said that baseball has been tainted because of players using steroids, and that it is important to expose the players. Aaron argued that Sports Illustrated compromised their integrity when they chose to only release one name, but did no other research on the other 103 players listed. Professor DuFresne pointed out that the only tip they got from their sources was about A-Rod. Another student said that if the choice came down to either publishing just one major story, or forfeiting the big story because no other players were identified, she would choose the story.

To finish off the discussion Professor DuFresne mentioned that a common defense of investigative reporting is that there are other news organizations working on the story as well.
The take-away cards talked about Stone’s optimism and the advice he gave for writing stories. The cards showed student’s interest in the matter of using controversy in writing for news and investigative reporting.

Take-Away Cards:

Jesse: I think his point about aspiring writers reading any, and all good writing, is an important piece of advice.

Kate: I thought it was interesting that he said writing should be conversational and have voice, even in “objective,” straight news. It goes against the formula we are taught, but I agree it’s preferable.

Joe: Confidential sources will never be revealed. Keep your clips and notebooks, you will never know when you need them.

Britton: I was amazed at how much I enjoyed the lecture Even though he is a sports editor he was intelligent and well versed and had a lot of good advice.

Anonymous: I really enjoyed his investigative story stuff. It was really interesting how he got around anonymous sources.

Alex: I thought it was interesting that he said journalism was a young person’s career - it is uplifting.

Anonymous: I though he did a great job outlining his job.

Mike: The best writing comes from writers who make things sound controversial.

Beren: Defining the job you want to do rather than the job applied is more important, and taking a non-traditional approach.