Bright Hall

The Future of Student News

BH Staff — 2009-04-29T10:53:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Small Campus, Big Story, Media

Bright Hall has evolved, has a new home and a new name. We are now part of Politics Daily, "a political news magazine for the general reader updated every day, throughout the day...offering a thoughtful take on events." We're honored to be a part of this adventurous and forward-thinking site launch.

Henceforth, we will be know as The Cram, but our purpose remains consistent:

"The Cram is opinion and analysis from accomplished student writers at higher learning institutions across America, where the future of politics is taking shape every day over collegial debate and caffeinated study. Join us as we break down the news cycle with an eye on campus issues and enough energy to conquer any syllabus."

You will find your favorite writers and new faces on The Cram, as well as a beat on the topics that interest you most. This week we've covered the continued controversy over Notre Dame's selection of President Obama as this year's commencement speaker, how the New York State budget is aversely effecting the state's student population, the continued towering tuition increases at our nation's universities, an exclusive speech made by the Bush Administration official who deemed waterboarding legal, and, right now, we're tweeting live from Obama's "100th Day" town hall in St. Louis.

We hope you'll continue to follow us in our new form. We promise to deliver the same brand of insightful campus coverage that you came back for.

The Editors

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Why Do Americans Oppose the Release of Information?

Matt Negrin — 2009-04-26T17:53:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Boston University, Media

Matt Negin is now a contributor for The Cram, a student news arm of the newly launched PoliticsDaily.com. To follow his future work, click here.

In a new Washington Post poll, most Americans approve of Barack Obama's performance during his first 100 days in office.

But although the Post led its Sunday story with that finding, another response in the survey about the recently released torture memos is considerably more newsworthy. Apparently, 44 percent of the public disapproves of Obama's decision to release secret documents from the Bush administration detailing the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Fifty-three percent approved.

That key question also revealed a deep partisan divide, with three-quarters of Democrats backing the disclosure of the memos and just as many Republicans opposing the hotly debated move.

Why does access to more information fall along a partisan split? I was just as perplexed last year when I covered the Roger Clemens steroids-in-baseball hearing on Capitol Hill, and Democrats on the government reform committee harshly interrogated The Rocket while their Republican counterparts defended him. (I still can't figure out why, and Clemens has not been recorded by the FEC for any GOP campaign donations.)

But when did the issue of releasing information -- albeit from the secretive Bush administration about the sensitive issue of torture -- begin to irk conservatives? Shouldn't the availability of information be heralded by all, whether it be documents implicating a Democratic governor of New York in a prostitution ring or sexual instant messages between a Republican congressman from Florida and his congressional pages?

Whether the new information about counter-terrorist interrogations during Bush's term justifies the use of waterboarding or exposes a lack of understanding about torture methods, the very fact that the public can debate the use of torture with more understanding is valuable. Public debate without appropriate information is just yelling or pandering (or cable-news filler).

For example, one nugget from the torture memos released April 16 includes information (some in a footnote) about how simulated drowning, or "waterboarding," was used 266 times on two suspects. This news raised questions of not only waterboarding's effectiveness, but its frequent use. Advocates and critics of waterboarding can now understand better the controversial topic they're debating.

Yet even after that news has been reported, 44 percent of the public (mostly Republican but not all) still think it was a bad idea for Obama to make those documents available to be read by anyone, according to the Post poll. The question was not a matter of defending or criticizing the use of torture; it was, "Obama has ordered the release of previously secret records of Bush administration policies on the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Do you support or oppose Obama's decision to release these records?" Out of everyone asked, 32 percent "strongly oppose" the president's move, and another 12 percent "somewhat oppose" it.

One of the arguments against the memos' release is that potential suspects now have a wider view into counter-terrorist methods. (Still, fake drowning is fake drowning, whether you know it's coming or not.) And then there's the idea that because terrorists are potentially very dangerous, maybe the public doesn't want to know what it takes to get information that could help authorities prevent an attack.

These points appear to be valid, but certainly not partisan; nobody on Capitol Hill wants to make it easier for terrorists to strike. What they should want is the most information available to adequately serve public discourse.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Magazine Capitalizes on Obama's Pecs

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-22T16:30:00+00:00

Filed under: News, Media, Notre Dame

The torture debate is getting exhausting, and it's only just begun. Did the United States torture? Was it wrong? Should people be prosecuted? Will Dick Cheney ever stop appearing on Fox News and just enjoy his retirement already?

Let's instead turn to a much lighter story. Washingtonian Magazine, which typically has such attention-grabbing cover stories as "Top 100 Dentists in the Washington Area" or "Top 30 Places to Visit on the Weekend," has put out a May cover that is getting way more attention than their April edition, "Inside 10 Great Homes."

The topic of this month's cover issue is "26 Reasons to Love Living Here." Reason No. 2 is: "Our new neighbor is hot."

To prove the point, the magazine put a picture of President Obama, clad only in a bathing suit and sunglasses, on the cover.

I know the print media industry is suffering right now, but really, Washingtonian Magazine? I didn't realize your editorial board consisted of the women from Desperate Housewives.
The best part of this story is that the magazine isn't even embarrassed that they have turned themselves into a checkout line gossip rag. At the top of their Web site, the magazine asks readers to weigh in with their thoughts on the May cover.

They call it "the cover heard 'round the world." I get the historical reference, but I believe the cover's been seen, not heard. Okay, now I'm just giving Washingtonian Magazine a hard time. Back to the task at hand.

The magazine says "Some of you love it; some of you hate it; some have questioned whether or not it's an 'appropriate' cover; and some just want to talk about the state of Obama's pecs."

The comments posted on the Web sites are mixed, but as one commenter posts, regardless of what one thinks about the photo, it works. People who have never heard of Washingtonian before are checking out the site.

The photo in question, CNN reported, was taken while Obama was in Hawaii on his Christmas vacation.

Garrett Graff, the editor-at-large for the magazine, told CNN that the picture was appropriate.

"The Obamas, through their involvement in Washington, are helping to showcase just how exciting it is in Washington right now," he told CNN. "We use the world 'hot' tongue in cheek with the photo."

He added: "He is a buff president that the paparazzi enjoy taking pictures of." Graff seems like a pretty interesting guy, and he's had a lot of good ideas in the past (he was founding editor of Fishbowl D.C.). I'll chalk this up to an act of desperation on the part of Washingtonian Magazine.

If The Economist starts running half-nude pictures of Barack Obama on its covers, then it's time for print magazines to pack it up and go home.

Photo: Washingtonian.com

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Espionage: Iran's New Word for, 'We Got Nothing'

Matt Negrin — 2009-04-19T08:51:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, International News, Boston University, Media

It's difficult to take a country's court system seriously when it convicts defendants in secret trials. It also doesn't help when the president of that country is a Holocaust denier and suspected terrorist. And it really doesn't look professional to accuse the defendant -- a journalist -- of "espionage" without providing a single piece of real evidence.

But such is the perplexing case of Roxana Saberi, the Iranian-American reporter who was convicted of spying by Iran's shady court this week. The prosecutors accused the 31-year-old journalist of passing along secret information to U.S. intelligence agencies.

Spying is a pretty serious career choice, not to mention time-consuming. For Saberi to successfully spy on the Iranian government, she would have to maintain a cover, make contacts and stay under the radar for most of the six years that she's lived in the country (at least, according to the Spy Museum tour I took in D.C.).

So if suspected spy Saberi was supposed to lay low, why was she filing dozens of stories each month for news organizations like the BBC, NPR and Fox? In June 2007, she was on the front line in Tehran when Iranians burned down gas stations in opposition to fuel rationing. And she was on the scene when the Islamic country banned women from soccer games the year before, too.

Either Roxana Saberi is a terrible spy, or she's not a spy at all.

That might explain why the Iranian government first arrested her on the charge of buying a bottle of wine. They continued to hold her by claiming that she wasn't a real journalist like she claimed because she didn't have press credentials. Well, that's true -- because Iran's government had revoked her press pass in 2006.

But maybe the Iranian government does have a case after all. As revealed by a simple Google search that I can only imagine is the sole tool Iran's prosecutors used, Saberi told the U.S. government two years ago detailed information about Iranian weapons. Prepare for damning evidence:

Specifically, she mentioned "missiles that are hard to track with radar, super-fast torpedoes recently tested in war games, and other domestically produced weapons" in addition to its "tanks, armoried personnel carriers, missiles and a fighter plane."

But when I say that Saberi told the U.S. government about those weapons, I mean that she told anyone who was listening to NPR -- or even Iran, which was boasting its weapons as part of its annual Army Day Parade when she reported that story. So scratch that line of argument.

So if it's nearly impossible to make the case that Saberi is a spy, why did Iran charge her with "espionage?" Aren't there other serious crimes to commit against the Iranian government, like celebrating Passover, or acknowledging the Holocaust, or buying a bottle of wine? According to Saberi's father, the charges were so ludicrous that she had to be "tricked" into confessing.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said that she's "deeply disappointed" in the ruling. I'm going to have to agree -- disappointed in the lack of creativity on Iran's part.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Tea Parties: Conservatives' New Media Launch?

Joshua Sharp — 2009-04-19T00:20:00+00:00

Filed under: US Elections, Politics, USC, Media

The "tax day tea parties" this week marked arguably the most visible sign of a conservative uprising since before Bush 43's presidency, with over 300,000 estimated attendees across nearly 350 cities nationwide.

But the larger impact embodied by these protests is a bit more subtle: It shows that conservatives have discovered new media in a very powerful way.

Political campaigns of all ideological viewpoints have long gathered e-mail lists of supporters and built professionally-designed websites to serve as their online presence. But only recently has the Internet evolved to serve as a global town hall, with activists uploading pictures and videos from events held around the world, and networking tool, with registered organizers pooling resources and sharing plans.

In the last election season, both Barack Obama and John McCain created social networking sites and event registration tools in addition to Facebook pages and a YouTube channel. The Obama campaign was more successful with these tools for a variety of reasons (younger base of supporters, ridiculous talent on staff), but the online media landscape is changing so rapidly that conservatives have a real chance at surpassing the most impressive techniques of the '08 cycle.

Beyond the ideological debate behind Wednesday's protests, the fact remains that hundreds of events, sometimes thousands of miles apart, were linked together by the power of social media, as organizers coordinated events online and exchanged pictures (video, stories, etc.) afterward.

More on new media after the jump...
Politico's Jonathan Martin co-moderated a panel Wednesday -- the same day as the tea parties -- with USC Unruh Institute of Politics director Dan Schnur on "Political Organizing in the Internet Age." I served as a panelist alongside some more experienced campaign experts; here are a few highlights:

- Message still paramount. Almost every panelist agreed that campaigns must use new media to reinforce an established, compelling campaign message. Creating an account on Twitter is useless if it does not engage the campaign's followers in a unique and ongoing way.

- 'Day-to-day combat.' Modern campaigns now have to hire extra staff to manage the 24-hour chatter generated by blogs and online news sites like Politico, said Jennifer Palmieri, senior VP of communications at the Center for American Progress. Leslie Miller, senior communications director at Obama for America, noted that Obama's "bitter" comment went viral on a late Friday afternoon, when campaign staff would normally be winding down from a long week. Instead, the campaign was forced into a flurry of action.

The instantaneous speed of modern messaging creates both a challenge and opportunity in the "day-to-day combat" of contemporary politics, added Adam Mendelsohn, former communications director for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Though harmful news can spread like wildfire, a campaign's response can be delivered just as rapidly through similar channels.

- Endless opportunities... to succeed, and to stumble. Palmieri suggested that new media makes each individual interview less important, but I disagreed, noting that George Allen is no longer a presidential contender after a certain "macaca" moment, and Sarah Palin's turkey pardon interview is permanently embedded in the public's memory, thanks to YouTube and other media outlets.

Toward the end of the panel discussion, Schnur pointed out that the former managing editor of USC's student newspaper, the Daily Trojan, was present and live-blogging for a new online media outlet run through the USC Annenberg journalism school. Her shift from print to online, Schnur said, was representative of a greater, global transformation.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Actress: Tea Protestors Were Redneck Racists

Joshua Chaney — 2009-04-17T23:17:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Culture, Media, Muskingum College

Don't like high taxes or runaway government spending? You're a dumb, redneck racist.

That's essentially what liberal actor Janeane Garofalo said on MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann last night. She was prompted to give a response on the Tea Party protests after Olbermann ranted on about the protesters "seething with hate." This from Olbermann, who essentially built an entire show around an hour-long, hate-filled rant about then president George W. Bush.

Olbermann still rants about Bush in a daily segment each on his show - 100 days after Bush left office, mind you. At what point is he forced to give it up? Still somehow - after Olbermann had finished his numerous immature references to male genitals, which he evidently thought were funny - Garofalo upstaged Olbermann on who could be the nuttiest hypocrite on stage.

"You know there is nothing more interesting than seeing a bunch of racists become confused and angry," she led off with. She went on to describe how none of the protesters could tell what the speakers were saying, or knew history at all.

"Let's be very honest about what this is about: It's not about bashing Democrats, it's not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston Tea Party was about, they don't know their history at all. This was about hating a black man in the White House," she said pointing her finger. "This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of tea-bagging rednecks and there is no way around that."

She couldn't just leave it at that, no way! She had much more hate left before she would be ready to give up the floor.

"You can tell these type of right-wingers anything and they'll believe it except the truth. You tell them the truth and they become -- it's like showing Frankenstein's monster fire -- they become confused and angry and highly volatile...The limbic brain of a right-winger or Republican or conservative or your average white power activist. Their limbic brain is much larger in their head space than in a reasonable person and it's pushing against the frontal lobe so their synapses are misfiring."

There is nothing that can be done to fix conservatives -- or just people who think they pay too much in taxes, she said, because it's about racism.

If you are concerned about runaway government spending, you evidently are an uneducated, brain damaged, redneck, racist who is unable to decipher truth from fiction.

Paul Begala got a little worked up over the tea protests on Imus in the Morning Wednesday as well saying that Tax Day was "the proudest, most patriotic day for 99 percent of Americans, that we have all year."

Are 99 percent of Americans really going to think of tax day as the most patriotic day of the year? Not in this lifetime. What about real patriotic days like July 4th, Armistice Day, Veterans Day, Memorial Day, etc.?

Begala went on to a call tea partiers "Wimpy, whining weasels" who "don't love their country."

One thing is certain: Begala and Garofalo didn't seem to have a problem with whining throughout the past eight years.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Interrogation Memos Reveal Rough Treatment of Detainees

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-16T21:00:00+00:00

Filed under: News, Media, Notre Dame

The U.S. Department of Justice on Thursday released four Office of Legal Counsel opinions that describe interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency during the Bush administration.

Politico reported that White House senior adviser David Axelrod said President Barack Obama spent a month trying to decide whether to release the memos about the techniques.

In a letter to the officers of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), posted on the agency's Web site, Obama thanked them for their service to the country. He said he made the decision the night before to allow the Justice Department to release the memos.

"I did not make this decision lightly," he wrote in the letter. "As you may know, the release is part of an ongoing court case. I have fought for the principle that the United States must carry out covert activities and hold information that is classified for the purpose of national security and will do so again in the future. But the release of these memos is required by our commitment to the rule of law."

Obama said that while he has prohibited use of the interrogation techniques described in the memo since he took office, he and Attorney General Eric Holder would "protect all who acted reasonably and relied upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that their actions were lawful." Holder affirmed this in a Thursday news release from the Department of Justice.

The individuals in the CIA who carried out the harsh interrogation actions will not be prosecuted, or so Obama says. Will anyone?
Although most of the information described in the memos was already known in general terms by the public, reading the details about interrogation methods is chilling.

One of the memos is signed by Jay S. Bybee, a Justice Department official at the time, and addressed to CIA attorney John A. Rizzo, dated Aug. 1, 2002. The memo states that the proposed interrogation techniques described in the memo would not violate U.S. law prohibiting torture.

The prisoner being discussed is Abu Zubaydah, believed to be a high ranking member of al Qaeda. "The interrogation team is certain that he has additional information that he refuses to divulge," the memo says. In order to obtain this information, the CIA desired to move the interrogations to the "increased pressure phase."

The interrogators wished to use 10 techniques, the memo says, including cramped confinement, placing insects in a confinement box, facial slapping and and escalation to waterboarding. I think everyone knows what waterboarding is by now. "Walling" is a new one I haven't heard of, but it involves a flexible false wall and the interrogator pulling the prisoner forward, then quickly pushing him back toward the wall, which will make a loud noise to shock the individual, thereby creating a sensation which seems like it would be akin to being in a car crash.

The memo concluded that walling was okay, and that this technique, like the nine others listed in the memo, did not qualify as torture: "You have informed us that the sound of hitting the wall will actually be far worse than any possible injury to the individual. ... While it may hurt to be pushed against the wall, any pain experienced is not of the intensity associated with serious physical injury."

CIA Director Leon E. Panetta sent a letter to CIA employees Thursday reaffirming that he would oppose any efforts to punish those members of the CIA who followed the guidance of the Justice Department.

"Although this Administration has now put into place new policies that CIA is implementing, the fact remains that CIA's detention and interrogation effort was authorized and approved by our government," Panetta wrote.

This is true, but at some point, shouldn't someone have stood up to say, this is the United States? This isn't right?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

How the News Is Fooling You

Matt Negrin — 2009-04-16T01:43:00+00:00

Filed under: Boston University, Media

Conventional business theory tells us that if consumers want a product, and if they can afford it, then they'll buy it. For the best items, there's no need to trick people into thinking they should spend money on something they don't need -- like OxiClean or Snuggies.

But gone are the days of conventional business. Now, companies are experimenting more and more with a type of advertising that is at best morally questionable, and desperate at worst. That technique is the fake news story.

The best example of this appeared April 9, when an advertisement dressed as a news story appeared on the front page of the Los Angeles Times. The ad, which had the headline, "Southland's Rookie Hero," under a small NBC logo, was a plug for a TV show about police officers. But it was written as if a Times reporter had gone out and done his own reporting on the fake setting of the show. The first paragraph of the advertisement reads, in part:

"This is the story of one such day when this reporter got a chance to ride along for a rookie's unforgettable first watch."

The ad, no doubt a huge cash grab for the Times (owned by the bankrupt Tribune Co.), was boxed in its own column adjacent to a real news story. The paper's reporters, upon seeing the ad that bumped some story to Page 3, petitioned the sneakiness of the ploy and said it "has caused incalculable damage to this institution. This action violates a 128-year pact with our readers that the front page is reserved for the most meaningful stories of the day. Placing a fake news article on A-1 makes a mockery of our integrity and our journalistic standards."

If only that instance were unique. Fake news ads are rare in print, but the same type of trickery can be found all over news websites online. On the increasingly popular Daily Beast site, for example, a news box below the header "Best of the Beast" teases a story called, "How Bottega Veneta Is Keeping Luxury Relevant." The ad apparently falls under the "Luxury" category and is also tagged as "Sponsored." It leads here, to a fake story under the classification, "Daily Beast Promotions."

At the Huffington Post, the public relations flaks for Shrek the Musical have planted a fake story where a real one might go, leading to a video player showing a brief clip of the performance. The headline is even mimicked in Huffington Post style: "WATCH: Shrek The Musical On Broadway," under a small highlighted tag that says, "Advertisement." The "author" of the fake story, on the ad's own Huffington Post page, is "Shrek The Musical."

The Drudge Report, in particular, has housed this type of ad style for much longer, giving advertisers a picture box in a story space virtually identical to main news items with same-sized graphics. The only discrepancy is this disclaimer below ads in what must be 3-point font: "Support The DrudgeReport; Visit Our Advertisers."

These teases seem dubious and shallow. There is a certain street-sense mantra that can be followed when observing ads, and that is: If an ad is pretending to be something else, be skeptical of both the product and the company. (You wouldn't immediately trust the man taking money from tourists on the side of the street with his trick-card deck, would you?)

The obvious caveat is that news organizations (print and online alike) need advertising dollars more than ever. The New York Times (which ran this front-page ad from CBS in January with the headline, "Front Page News") reported Tuesday that some big papers will report a 30 percent drop in ad revenue during the first three months of this year. Big players in the media circle are also playing with new ways to make money off of news, like asking readers to pay to read stories, similar to how the Wall Street Journal charges for its content.

But the solution cannot be cleverly placed faux features that simultaneously trick readers and devoid their expectations of journalistic integrity. They may not be as irritating as pop-up ads, but at least pop-up ads are more honest.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Tea Parties Planned for Tax Day

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-15T08:25:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Breaking News, News, Media, Notre Dame

The Internet has been buzzing lately all about parties happening on Tax Day. Tea Parties, to be exact.

I never got an invitation, but I'm more of a coffee drinker. It'd be a bit of a pain to purchase tea bags just to dump them in a body of water.

Like the great pre-Revolutionary War colonists who came before them, American taxpayers are up in arms and want to protest "higher taxes and out-of-control government spending," according to a column in the Wall Street Journal Tuesday. It's hard to tell who exactly started this movement, but the columnist asserted that this is not the work of a "right-wing conspiracy," but rather, average Americans who are using the expanding power of the Internet to organize an imitation of an event that took place in 1773.

According to the Wall Street Journal column, the protests began in mid-February with bloggers in Seattle, Wash., then grew when CNBC commentator Rick Santelli delivered his now famous rant against President Obama's policies, advocating that people organize a tea party in Chicago on July 4.

From that rant, a movement was born. Now these flash mob protests are apparently planned across the country on Tax Day. The Tea Party movement is one of the top trending topics on Twitter, and on Facebook a group called Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party has more than 35,000 members.

I'm always up for a party. And those are big numbers. I'd love to fly home to watch protesters dump a million tea bags in Lafayette Square in Washington D.C, as the protest organizers say they will, according to a Washington Post story.

Imagine if we took that tea and, provided it was caffeinated, gave it to American workers. Think of the productivity we'd see on Tax Day!

On second thought, the people organizing the Tax Day Tea Party probably don't need any more caffeine. This grass-roots movement has grown surprisingly quickly. A lot of people are comparing it to Obama's use of the Internet in 2008 to increase enthusiasm for his campaign. Except, with Obama, there were a lot fewer teabags. And fewer unfortunate inappropriate jokes. (I'm not explaining it. Look it up.)

A Web site called Tax Day Tea Party purports to be the online headquarters for the tea partiers. A "revolution is brewing at a city near you" they say. Besides being clever at wordplay, the site's creators have also done a good job of listing Tea Party events occurring in every state.

Over on her Web site, conservative columnist Michelle Malkin has a playlist of songs for the Tea Parties. I recommend the reader-suggested rendition of "American Pie."

If you cannot make it out to a local Tea Party, the Republican National Committee has a way for you to participate. Go to their Web site and you can mail a postcard to President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Harry Reid or Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Best of all, you can choose one of four varieties of tea bags to send along with your postcard.

At the White House briefing Tuesday, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he is not sure if Obama knows about the planned parties, but Gibbs said he personally is not monitoring them.

If the Tea Parties don't work, perhaps some other famous event in American History can be re-staged? A flash mob to cry that the British are coming or a re-enactment of Washington crossing the Delaware?

If nothing else, all this flash-mobbing will improve our collective knowledge of this country's history.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Will Bright Hall Win a Pulitzer?

Matt Negrin — 2009-04-08T02:48:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Boston University, Media

First, to answer the question: Probably not -- but only because the Pulitzer Foundation refuses to accept blog entries.

Still, nobody knows for sure, because this year, the list of Pulitzer finalists has not been leaked. Usually, the chief of Editor & Publisher, Joe Strupp, names them on his media-focused website after Pulitzer jurors slip him the nominations anonymously. This lets journalists and readers debate over who they think deserves which prize for which scoop, and it can be fun.

Not this year. "They all shut their mouths," Strupp told Roy J. Harris Jr. on Romenesko. "It's the tightest it's been for leaks in years."

There's still about two weeks left until this year's best-in-journalism prizes are announced, and anyone and everyone is eligible. For those of you upset that March Madness is over and want to play some pick-'em games, that's what the "comments" section is for.

Here are some starters, brainstormed in the spirit of Joseph Pulitzer, a sensationalist yellow journalist who threw wild accusations around in his papers during the Spanish-American War:

Best Objective Reporting - Chris Matthews's "Oh God" moment introducing Bobby Jindal.

Best Scoop - Sarah Palin's allegation that Barack Obama is "palling around" with Bill Ayers.

Most Politically Correct Editorial Cartoon - The New York Post's dead-monkey drawing.

Most Sincere Apology - The one for the New York Post's dead-monkey drawing.

Most Relevant/Senseless On-Air Rant Against the Bailout - This guy.

Strongest Solution to Save the News Industry - Jon Stewart, or possibly The Onion.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Aaron Schock Adds Sex Appeal to Republican Party

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-07T22:19:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Featured Stories, News, Media, Notre Dame

The Republican Party keeps getting sexier.

They've had an uphill battle. In the fall, John McCain had to compete with the sex appeal of Barack Obama (those abs!) and Joe Biden (those teeth!), but McCain proved he had more sexy in reserve than America has oil in reserve offshore when he introduced Sarah Palin (those legs!) as his running mate.

But Americans voted "Yes, we can" instead of "Drill, baby, drill," and Palin retreated back to Alaska, so the Republicans were left with a sexy deficit (except for when Palin family scandals pop up in the news once a week).

That deficit has been filled. Aaron Schock is in the House.

Of Representatives, that is. Schock represents Illinois' 18th District, and at 27, he is the youngest Member of Congress and the first to be born in the 1980s. He's not just a pretty face, hair and body. Not surprisingly, Schock is your typical over-achiever. He graduated from Bradley University in Peoria, Ill. with a B.S. in Finance, a four-year degree, in two years.

In his early teens, he began working after-school jobs and invested the money he made, making his first real estate purchase at age 18, according to his official House Web site. He entered public service by serving on the Peoria School board starting when he was 18 years old.

When he was 23, he was elected to the Illinois House, where he shared the 2007 award with then-Senator Barack Obama from the Illinois Committee for Honest Government for his "Outstanding Legislative and Constituent Service." He spoke at the 2008 National Republican Convention, and now that he is in Congress, he is sitting on three committees: the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the Small Business Committee and the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He's also been named Deputy Republican Whip.

And, perhaps most notably, he's been named "hottest freshman in Congress" by the readers of the liberal blog site Huffington Post.

Schock has been getting a lot more attention in the media than the average freshman Member of Congress, due to his good looks and young age. Meghan McCain wrote a blog post for The Daily Beast about "The GOP's House Hottie." I opened the Chicago Tribune yesterday to find an article about Schock, asking "Has GOP found its rock star?"

TMZ has been following Schock as he walks between his office building and the Capitol, and a few weeks ago posted a picture of Schock in his bathing suit (Schock gives shirtless Obama a run for his money).

Schock appeared on CNN's Reliable Sources with Howard Kurtz, also of the Washington Post, who asked him about his appearances on TMZ. In a weird moment, Kurtz asks Schock if he wants to take off his jacket and roll up his sleeves to give TMZ more footage. Luckily, Schock had the common sense not to disrobe for a Sunday morning show. Save it for the late night shows.

Schock has a Doogie Howser meets Brad Pitt thing going on. He should own it. In the Chicago Tribune Monday, he told reporter James Oliphant he's using the media coverage to keep communication channels open.

"First, you've got to get their attention," he said. "Step one in getting anyone's vote is getting their attention."

First Barack Obama. Now Aaron Schock. Illinois' prime export is quickly becoming hot, young, driven politicians.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

North Korea Launches Rocket, Prompts Famous 3 a.m. Phone Call

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-06T00:06:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Breaking News, News, Media, Notre Dame

Hillary Clinton saw this coming.

President Barack Obama got his 3 a.m. phone call, albeit at 4:30 a.m. Sunday morning in Prague, Czech Republic, when North Korea launched a long-range rocket. That's a sudden way to remind someone that being president isn't all about the economy.

Last year, when Obama and Clinton were still vying for the Democratic nomination, Clinton put out an ad saying she was the best one to answer the theoretical 3 a.m. phone call because she had the experience. Obama replied to her political advertisement with a nearly identical one that said he should answer the theoretical 3 a.m. phone call because he had better judgment.

The scenario became reality Sunday when North Korea launched the rocket they'd been threatening to launch for several weeks. The North Korean government said they had conducted a successful, peaceful launch of a satellite into orbit, CNN reported. But the United States and South Korea characterized the launch as a "provocative act" and said the rocket's payload failed to enter orbit, instead falling into the Pacific Ocean near Japan.

CNN quoted a State Department spokesman as saying the launch was in violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution on North Korea's weapons program, which prohibits the country from conducting ballistic missile-related activities.White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said he personally woke Obama to tell him the launch had been confirmed, and that Obama then consulted with his top aides, including Clinton, who was in Prague with Obama to participate in the European Union summit.

Obama responded strongly to the North Korean actions, which weren't much of a surprise since the North Koreans had been talking about the launch for weeks. His statements focused on the need for an international response to North Korea's rogue behavior.

"North Korea must know that the path to security and respect will never come through threats and illegal weapons," Obama said, according to a CNN report. "All nations much come together to build a stronger global regime. That's why we must stand shoulder to shoulder to pressure the North Koreans to change course."

A few days before the launch, FOX News's Greta Van Susteren asked former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich what he would do about North Korea if he was president. Gingrich criticized Obama for his foreign policy approach towards North Korea, which he said entailed "being courteous to them and communicating with them."

If he were president, he told Van Susteren, he would have used "whatever methods were necessary for the missile never to be launched." That could mean using the military if necessary, he said.

"If I can't find a way to bribe somebody to blow it up, I'd find a way to have either a small team go in, or a way to deliver a laser or another kind of device," he said on FOX. "That is a missile that is sitting there on that launch pad, and I think you could take it out with very, very minimal risk to anybody."

There's been some speculation that Gingrich will run for president in 2012. If he does, I propose he runs an ad showing Obama taking 4:30 a.m. phone calls while Gingrich is fast asleep--because he already took care of the problem with lasers.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

What's Really Funny About Tribune's April Fools' Prank

Matt Negrin — 2009-04-03T03:11:00+00:00

Filed under: Breaking News, Boston University, Media, The Economy

The bankrupt brains at Tribune Co. sure had a laugh Wednesday. After filing for bankruptcy, shrinking their papers' Washington bureaus and firing hundreds of employees across the country, Tribune thought it could make it all better with a joke.

So on April Fools' Day, they issued a press release -- accompanied by a mysteriously well-designed homepage -- that boasted the creation of something called the "Accelerator," some kind of super-communications thingy that threatens to make the Internet obsolete in a year. It uses nanotechnology, it displays holographs, it has voice recognition in every language, and it has a plutonium battery. All this (and so much more) is detailed on Tribune's release and website, which looks like it took hours, and maybe days, to perfect.

When crafting this prank, Tribune's idea men -- Sam Zell, Lee Abrams and Randy Michaels -- must have put a lot of effort into it, maybe even working overtime. Michaels, the chief operating officer, says in the fake news release that the Accelerator team "put in long hours, many of them sober. And this marvelous device is the result -- The Accelerator(TM) will mean billions in revenue, and the end of the extremely competitive advertising environment in which we've been operating."

Nobody laughed very hard upon reading this. And given Abrams's propensity for writing "think pieces" full of misspellings, ALL-CAPS DECLARATIONS and stream-of-consciousness ideas from a dream-like state, it's no surprise that the Tribune team made its highest priority for April 1 wiping out its Tribune.com website to promote a product that isn't real. (Abrams's style is not representative of the papers his company owns; in addition to not proofreading, he also doesn't check facts, which is evident in this January blast about a quote from Mariah Carey that she never said.)

So who was the joke intended for? Investors who wanted to see how the flailing company is performing after the first three months of 2009? Editors of the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times who wanted to see if their newsrooms would be losing more money this month?

Perhaps the group laughing the least is the growing number of laid off journalists who have felt the slice of the mighty Tribune sword. Former reporters of the Tribune's Hartford Courant, which fired 100 employees in February, have formed an "Alumni Association and Refugee Camp." One of them, noting that the folks in the Tribune Co. tower have more time on their hands than those at the struggling papers who are picking up more work for less wages, visited the Hartford newsroom and saw that the journalists "are in no mood for jokes -- at least corporately produced jokes."

(I know for a fact that Courant reporters love good fun; when I was an intern there last summer, the staffers dug out the eyes of CEO Zell's face on a cake before devouring it, in between two waves of buyouts.)

For what it's worth, though, the press release for Tribune's phony gadget has a glimmer of truth in it -- but not for the Accelerator. Rather, for Tribune.

Take, for example, this quote from Tribune Interactive President Marc Chase (real person): "There are still a few bugs to be worked out." Like the billions of dollars in debt that Zell heaved onto the company when he overtook it in December 2007?

Chase also says, "We're confident that we're in the end-stage development phase." That may be a bit foreboding for a company operating under Chapter 11 and not showing any signs of ever seeing numbers in the black again.

Michaels, though, was more direct in his triumph. "The game is over," he said. "We win."

Hilarious.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Who's Leading the Republican Party?

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-02T00:03:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Media, Notre Dame

I'm rooting for Michael Steele.

Partly because the chairman of the Republican National Committee is the former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, my home state. And because one time I saw him campaigning at my local grocery store, and he handed me a flyer, so I feel some sort of connection to him.

But mostly because the Republican Party needs a strong leader now that the Democrats are running the show in Washington. Let's bring back the two-party system.

Steele hasn't had a strong start. I was impressed when he tried to put conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh in his place, but Steele quickly backed down and praised the bombastic radio personality instead. He made another mistake when he contradicted the Republican stance on abortion a few weeks later.

But let's take a look at the other options for the Republican Party.

CNN Senior Political Analyst Bill Schneider wrote a story Wednesday looking at the Republican hopefuls for the 2012 race. The Party should choose a leader before then, but the options don't look great, according to Schneider's article.

Schneider picked former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who won the straw poll taken at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) recently, former vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin, former presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.

Romney admitted to CNN's Larry King that the GOP doesn't have "one spokesman" right now, reported Schneider.

"That's just one of the features of not having either house in Congress or having the White House," Romney said. "You don't have an official place to be heard."

Politico reported a few weeks ago that a recent report from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press showed that few people were able to name who they consider to be the leader of the GOP. Seventy-three percent of Americans responded that either the GOP has no leader, or, if they do, they don't know who it would be.

Of those who could name a GOP leader, 11 percent named Sen. John McCain and 5 percent named Rush Limbaugh. Gingrich and Steele both got 2 percent of the vote.

Clearly, the GOP has a leadership gap that needs to be filled. The Baltimore Sun reported Wednesday that Steele spoke at a fundraiser Tuesday, urging members of the party to stop infighting and be more like him, meaning "unconventional, unpredictable ... to do from time to time the unexpected."

President Obama and the Democrats are running the country, and the conversation. Someone give Chairman Steele some media training so he stops sticking his foot in his mouth, then let's see him present a strong, yet productive, counterpoint to Obama.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

FOX News Launches FOX Nation

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-04-01T01:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, National News, Media, Notre Dame

Conservative commentators on FOX News may have argued against the election of Barack Obama during the campaign, but they can't deny that four -- or eight -- years of an Obama administration will be good for their business.

FOX News Channel, which has long been the No. 1 cable news operation, extended its lead over CNN and MSNBC in recent months, the New York Times reported. Bill O'Reilly's show, The O'Reilly Factor, reached a milestone in March of 100 consecutive months as the most popular program on cable news.

FOX recently launched a new Web site, The FOX Nation, which the AP described as a "Huffington Post-style" site, a reference to Arianna Huffington's left-leaning blog site.

Though FOX is a leader on television, it falls behind on the Internet, the AP said, with 16 million unique visitors in February compared with MSNBC.com's 41 million viewers and CNN.com's 36 million.

The new Web site features one of the most grandiose introductory letters ever posted on a Web site. The letter lauds America as the "city on a hill," and says FOX Nation is dedicated to the people of America who have made it great.

And I thought FOX Nation was just a way to boost traffic to their online product at a time when the government, particularly Obama and Democrats in Congress, are doing a lot of things to irk conservatives.

Of course, these are hard times, FOX Nation says, but Americans have always risen up to face challenges and will again.

"How, exactly, should we assure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" the letter says. "How do we perfect our union? How can we make certain that children of all races are fairly judged, not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character?"

The answer to FOX Nation's questions is, of course, FOX Nation.

"FOX Nation will be a forum for Americans to speak out on important and controversial issues, and to act out their beliefs and values -- while always upholding the traditional American ideals of free speech, fair play and tolerance," the letter says.

The site is a more user-friendly version of FOX News' actual Web site. It features content from O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck, and the AP reported that FOX Nation will be adding social networking components and encouraging visitors to post their opinions in response to the stories.

FOX Nation is also one of the few news organizations where Joe the Plumber remains a top news story. So now you know where to go to get your daily Joe.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

North Korea Detains Two American Journalists

Adam Kirchner — 2009-03-31T23:39:00+00:00

Filed under: International News, Media, Towson University

Two American journalists face five to ten years' detention in a North Korean labor camp after being seized by border guards and charged with "illegal entry" and carrying out "hostile" activities, according to a Reporters Sans Frontièrs (Reporters Without Borders) report dated March 31.

RSF, an international organization advocating and monitoring freedom of the press, reports that the journalists were near the Chinese border with North Korea investigating the smuggling of North Korean women into China for sale. RSF cites multiple anonymous sources that suspect that the American journalists were on the Chinese side of the Tumen River when North Korean border guards crossed into China to capture them on March 17, which contradicts North Korea's assertion and refutes their jurisdiction.

Euna Lee (pictured, left) and Laura Ling (pictured, right), of the San Francisco-based Current TV Web site, a media outlet chaired by former Vice President Al Gore, are detained in North Korea while their guide, an ethnic Korean with Chinese citizenship, is detained in China. A fourth member of the group arrested in the incident, cameraman Mitch Koss, was detained in China then deported.

RSF calls the detention of the two American journalists by North Korea "diplomatic blackmail," timed conspicuously around the scheduled missile launch to send a satellite into orbit, which some -- including Japan and the United States -- are concerned will be a test of long-range missiles capable of carrying warheads.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

The 3 Most Awkward Recession Stories

Tony Romm — 2009-03-31T20:32:00+00:00

Filed under: Media, The Economy, American University

It is hardly a secret that journalists relish crises of all flavors. Distress, economic or otherwise, satiates our inner-most desires to break important news. Occasionally this excitement verges on nauseating.

If that general prognosis immediately conjures images of economic recession stories gone sour, you're probably not alone. In the months that have followed the controversial Troubled Asset Relief Program, journalists have penned countless stories -- some veritably profound and insightful, many alarmingly pathetic and unsound. Here's a sampling of the best of the worst:

1. Recession Sex!

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch posed a question for the ages last Friday -- does the chilly economy heat up the boring bedroom? Presumably, the author augurs, "People are spending less, especially on entertainment and restaurants. They're staying in and looking for cheaper ways to have fun." And because the sex industry has also suffered -- brothels in Nevada are now attributing their staggering losses to the recession, while the pornography industry has all but lost its clientele -- married men and women are hedging their wedding stock options (err, vows) and finally enjoying themselves. The result, experts allege, has been a manifest (yet unmeasurable) increase in relationship success rates. However, if recession sex is anything like its cacophonous predecessor terror sex, the fun won't last long. Case in point...

2. Recession vasectomies!

"In troubled times, vasectomies snip and prosper" -- or so says CNN, which published the story on Tuesday. According to writer Madison Park, a number of males recently left unemployed by the recession (and thus, without health benefits) have sought the "symbolic snip" as the ultimate contraceptive. Some clinics, including one profiled in the CNN article, have even tried to capitalize on this trend with creative gimmicks like "Vas-Madness" -- an awe-inspiring combination of the male community's fear of pregnancy with the popular NCAA Men's Basketball tournament. "[Patients] would love to have a procedure, go home and sit there when you've got all-day programming, watch basketball," the mastermind doctor told CNN. True, you may not be able to afford a television on which to watch those games, but...
3. Ode to an airplane repossessed! You would think from The New York Times' diatribe last week on aviation foreclosures that airplane repo men are the modern-day equivalents of Revolutionary era British tax collectors. The newspaper treats the 100 personal jets at risk of foreclosure this year as the biggest national epidemic since, well, the recession itself. Adding to the lament of lost luxury is the Atlanta Journal-Constitution report about the revival of frugality (as if college students ever let it die), the Economic Times "castle sales" eulogy, and Bloomberg touting Japanese fasionistas' robot model troubles as microcosms of a larger, global financial crisis.

Of course, that's not all: Since November 2008, journalists have penned additional pieces attributing a number of other odd trends to the recession, including a rise in shoe repair transactions, a jump in dollar store profits and an increase in cremations.

Add to those tangents an onslaught of awkward photos -- perhaps struggling newspapers should compile their numerous "sad investor" pics into a calendar and sell it to stay afloat -- and it's easy to understand why the Obama administration now offers online resources for Americans suffering from "recession depression."

Such questionable reportage threatens to saturate the "information marketplace," further contributing to Americans' disinterest in the country's economic affairs. It also depicts us reporters as tasteless, veritably bitter and, frankly, just not very good.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Brits to Teach Twitter and Wikipedia In Schools

Adam Kirchner — 2009-03-28T01:03:00+00:00

Filed under: International News, Media, Towson University

An anticipated report announcing changes in elementary school curriculum in England will add the study of Wikipedia and Twitter while allowing schools to opt out of teaching the Victorian era or World War II, which are taught extensively in secondary education.

Former Office for Standards in Education chief Sir Jim Rose assessed the existing British primary education curriculum and prioritized the study of blogging, podcasts, Wikipedia and Twitter as "sources of information and forms of communication," according to The Guardian, which the BBC cites as breaking the story.

In The Guardian's article, head of education of Britain's National Union of Teachers, John Bangs, comments that "computer skills and keyboard skills seem to be as important as handwriting in [Rose's report]. Traditional books and written texts are downplayed in response to web-based learning."

Ironically, Wikipedia cites a Guardian article published in the past five years which cites a librarian and Internet consultant, Philip Bradley, stating that "theoretically, [Wikipedia] is a lovely idea, but practically, I wouldn't use it and I'm not aware of a single librarian who would. The main problem is the lack of authority. With printed publications, the publishers have to ensure that their data is reliable, as their livelihood depends on it. But with something like [Wikipedia], all that goes out the window."

That is, Wikipedia cites the latter Guardian article until any given person on the entire planet omits (knowingly or not) the citation from the Wikipedia wiki page about itself, throwing the link to the quote about throwing credibility out the window, out the window.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Obama Commencement Coverage Focuses on Protesters

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-03-26T02:01:00+00:00

Filed under: Culture, Religion, News, Local, Media, Notre Dame

Kaitlynn Riely, a student at the University of Notre Dame, is delivering the latest news and opinions on the growing Obama Commencement controversy from South Bend. See her coverage on the progression of this media event here, here and here.

I'm starting to feel like I'm living in an abortion debate-themed production of West Side Story.

Ever since Notre Dame announced that President Barack Obama would deliver the May 17 Commencement address, those against hosting Obama because of his pro-choice beliefs and actions have been rumbling, mostly on the Internet and in print, with those who want him to speak here.

I can almost hear the snapping.

The argument is taking place in the opinion pages of Notre Dame's student newspaper, The Observer. The national media has picked up the story. Catholic and pro-life blogs and Web sites are condemning the University for asking a pro-choice politician to speak at Notre Dame and deciding to give him an honorary doctor of laws degree.

But for all the Obama drama, I've only spoken to a few students who are against him speaking here in May. And back in October, Notre Dame's student government conducted a mock election and the results were 52.6 percent for Obama, 41.1 percent for McCain.

The reason it seems, from media coverage, like popular Notre Dame community sentiment is against having Obama speak is because the people opposed to Obama speaking are doing a very good job of organizing and getting their opinion out.

Case in point: Today, a coalition of Notre Dame student groups launched a Web site and issued a press release denouncing the University's choice of Obama as Commencement speaker, an objection, they said, that was not based on "political partisanship" but due to Obama's "hostility to the Catholic Church's teachings on the sanctity of human life at its earliest stages."

The coalition, made up of 11 Notre Dame student groups, asked that only members of the Notre Dame community lead protests against the University's decision.

"Over the next several weeks, in response to this scandal, our organizations will host various academic and religious events to engage the University community," the statement said. It was signed by the 11 student clubs, which include the Notre Dame chapters of Right to Life and the College Republicans.

A Notre Dame alum started an online petition for people who support having Obama on campus, but that petition has gotten little notice. Scan the Internet, and it would seem most Notre Dame people oppose Obama speaking and receiving an honorary degree. It is true that there are many, many people who are against him speaking, and their position has merit. But the media is ignoring the large numbers who are thrilled to have Obama speak at Commencement.

The White House responded to the controversy late Tuesday, reported ABC's Political Punch blog. Deputy White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Obama was "honored" to address the graduation class, but said he understands there are students, parents and alums who don't want him there.

"While he is honored to have the support of millions of people of all faiths, including Catholics with their rich tradition of recognizing the dignity of people, he does not govern with the expectation that everyone sees eye to eye with him on every position and the spirit of debate and healthy disagreement on important issues is part of what he loves about this country," Psaki said.

But the negative reaction has been so loud, and so widely covered, that there's been less coverage of the "healthy disagreement" and more coverage of the outrage by some about the choice. I cannot foresee Obama deciding not to come, or Notre Dame rescinding his invitation. When May 17 has passed, will the story of this controversy be that most Notre Dame people were against his coming? Or will it be clear that many students supported Obama speaking at graduation?

As I did yesterday, I'll end again with my favorite Obama Drama moment of the day. Two Notre Dame students were interviewed on Fox's Greta Van Susteren Wednesday night about their opposition to Obama. At the end of the interview, Van Susteren congratulated the girls on their upcoming graduation.

Her congrats came about a year too early. Both girls are juniors, so they cannot go to Commencement anyway. Greta ended the segment before they could make the correction.

Everyone has the right to have an opinion on Obama speaking at Commencement, but let's see the media seek the opinions of Notre Dame seniors, for whom this decision primarily affects.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Bishop to Boycott Obama Commencement Speech at Notre Dame

Kaitlynn Riely — 2009-03-25T00:30:00+00:00

Filed under: Politics, Small Campus, Big Story, Culture, Religion, News, Local, Media, Notre Dame

Bishop John M. D'Arcy, who presides over Indiana's Fort Wayne-South Bend Diocese, which includes Notre Dame, announced Tuesday he will not be attending Notre Dame's May 17 Commencement, since President Barack Obama will be speaking.

"Can I have the Bishop's ticket?" my friend posted on the Web site Twitter.com.

D'Arcy has clashed with Notre Dame in the past, most significantly when University President Fr. John Jenkins issued a statement in 2006 allowing The Vagina Monologues to be performed on campus. Now it's Obama's pro-choice stances and decisions, rather than vaginas, that have gotten D'Arcy's Irish up.

Notre Dame and the White House announced Friday that Obama would be speaking at Notre Dame's May 17 Commencement ceremony, with Jenkins following up Monday clarifying that asking Obama to speak, and awarding him with an honorary doctor of laws degree, does not signify support of his policies. Most students, from my observations on campus, seem to be supportive of and excited about hearing Obama speak. But a vocal student minority, as well as alumni and unaffiliated pro-life groups, have protested the decision vehemently.

In his statement Tuesday, D'Arcy said Jenkins informed him of Obama's acceptance shortly before the announcement was made. D'Arcy said it was the first time he'd been told about the invitation. This May is the 25th Notre Dame graduation since D'Arcy became bishop, and for the first time, he said, he will not attend.

"After much prayer, I have decided not to attend the graduation," he said. "I wish no disrespect to our president, I pray for him and wish him well. I have always revered the Office of the Presidency. But a bishop must teach the Catholic faith 'in season and out of season,' and he teaches not only by his words -- but by his actions."

He added: "My decision is not an attack on anyone, but is in defense of the truth about human life."

I understand that D'Arcy has major disagreements with Obama over abortion and stem cell issues. But isn't he giving up a unique opportunity to pull the president aside for a moment and voice his concerns? It may not make a difference in Obama's stances, but when else will D'Arcy have the ear of the president?

I'm unimpressed with D'Arcy's leadership. The pro-life movement's sign-carrying, march-making approach hasn't worked so far, and I doubt the Bishop's boycott will make any difference in abortion policy in the United States. It just distances the Catholic Church from the decision-making process.

Too bad. I wish D'Arcy had been a bit braver and seen the opportunity, rather than ask whether Notre Dame has "chosen prestige over truth."

D'Arcy's ticket won't go to waste. Notre Dame seniors, who are only guaranteed 3 tickets each for graduation, have been posting on Facebook asking those who don't want Obama to speak at Notre Dame to give away their tickets.

Security itself on graduation day promises to be intense. But already, with two months to go, life in the Notre Dame bubble is becoming surreal. Leaving the gym this afternoon, I stopped by a television because a woman from a local television station was delivering a report from my campus.

When I got back to my room, a friend told me Notre Dame was on CNN.

Does this controversy have the momentum to last two months? Pro-life groups will certainly try their best. Everyone here has a viewpoint on the Obama drama.

My favorite opinion of the day came in a letter to the editor published in Notre Dame's student newspaper, The Observer. The author of the letter is a student at Saint Mary's, the all-women college across the street from Notre Dame, who asked whether the Notre Dame "administration considered the impact such an important political figurehead will have on the travel plans of the other schools graduating that weekend."

I imagine potential traffic congestion is the last thing Jenkins is thinking about this week.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments