Tag Archives: journalism

Sunday Scraps 102

sunday102

1. JOURNALISM: This my be my favorite editorial I’ve read in quite some time. From Tim Krieder at the NYT, he writes about uncertainty of stating one’s opinions on the internet: “I felt like the explanatory caption beneath my name on-screen ought to be: PERSON IN WORLD.” This is basically exactly how I feel about everything.

2. STYLE: Ever wonder about Rihanna’s hairstylist? Who is this person? Where did he or she come from? NYMag has got you covered.

3. WAR: In this not at all scientific but very strangely powerful series, soldiers are photographed before, during, and after war.

4. TELEVISION: How to make a good drama that wins lots of awards. Is there a formula for that? Perchance there is and it’s only 13 steps!

5. GEOGRAPHY: Highly difficult, highly addictive, Geoguessr is game where google streetview displays a picture and you try to guess where in the world it was taken. Good luck with Australia vs. Texas.

6. DEPRESSION: Blogger Allie Brosh is back after a long hiatus. This webcomic explains where she’s been, and also does a pretty excellent job at describing depression to those that are not depressed. Play close attention to the fish analogy.

Related Post: Sunday 101 – Dear Daughter, Colbert’s “homophobe” song, Lennon and Maisey

Related Post: Sunday 102 – Why lady looks matter, SCOTUS, Huma + Anthony, football tragedy

3 Comments

Filed under Art, Gender, Hollywood, Media, Really Good Writing by Other People

Sunday Scraps 98

sunday98

1. CHINA: Excellent long-form piece for the NYT Magazine about the marriage market in China. A huge gender imbalance has created a strange and stressful dynamic at every economic strata of society.

2. LENA: In this Playboy interview, Lena Dunham explains, among other things, why she’s pleased she doesn’t look like a supermodel.

3. JOURNALISM: Super fascinating look at the work of Bob Woodward. In researching his own Belushi biography, journalist Tanner Colby unravels the shoddy work of one of the most famous journalists of all time.

4. WRITERS: The relationship between writer (George Saunders) and editor (Andy Ward) is pulled apart in insane detail in this Slate interview. Jesus, these people are smaaaart.

5. BULLY: In the XX Factor‘s ongoing series about bullying, a current rabbi confronts her past as a member of a menacing tween gang.

6. GENDERMother Jones measures the voting records of members of Congress on women’s issues. Unsurprisingly, there’s a correlation with having daughters and a pro-woman voting record. Sigh.

Related Post: Sunday 97: Anita Sarkeesian, DNA exploring, Cindy Gallop and Ta-Nehisi Coates

Related Post: Sunday 96: Philip Roth, duct tape art, Playboy mansion visits

2 Comments

Filed under Body Image, Books, Gender, Hollywood, Media, Politics, Really Good Writing by Other People

Monday Scraps 95

sunday96

1. DATING: Where do “missed connections” happen? In Illinois, on the train (duh), in Indiana, at home. Wait, what?

2. AUTHORS: Ugh. Ender’s Game was kind of my favorite thing for so so long. It still is, but I hate when the authors you love turn out to be raging homophobes. Dammit.

3. EDUCATION: This amazing investigative piece by WBEZ on the South Side’s Harper High School is incredible in basically every way journalism can be incredible.

4. KNOPE: NYMag has the inside scoop behind Amy Poehler/Leslie Knope’s amazing wedding dress.

5. SPORTS: For the very first time, a woman is participating in the NFL regional tryouts. Kicker Lauren Silberman will probably not play in the NFL, but that’s still pretty f’ing cool.

6. OSCARS: I would write about Seth McFarlane’s horribly sexist jokes, but Margaret Lyons at NYMag  nailed it so hard I’d just be paraphrasing. 

Related Post: Sunday Scraps 94: Bey, Connie Britton, Jane Austen and more.

Related Post: Sunday Scraps: 93: Guns, visiting Chicago, Margaret Atwood

3 Comments

Filed under Books, Chicago, Education, Gender, Hollywood, Media, Politics, Sports

Sunday Scraps 94

sunday94

1. DIVA: NYMag counted out the most un-diva moments in Beyonce’s new HBO documentary.

2. GUNS: This sprawling ridiculous, incredible, challenging essay from the Center for Investigative Reporting follows “the shooter” who killed Osama Bin Laden as he reenters civilian life.

3. JOURNALISM: Did you know the Antarctica has a newspaper? With an editor and everything! Read an interview with him, Peter Rejcek, in The Hairpin.

4. CONNIE: My love for Connie Britton will never die. Apparently, I’m not alone in my devotion, at least, according to this NYTimes profile on the former Mrs. Taylor.

5. TECH: Stacey Mulcahy’s excellent letter has made the rounds this week, but if you missed it, read it now. Her 8-year-old niece wants to be a game-designer, so she wrote a letter to “future women in tech.”

6. JANE: This is a fun, short investigation into the life of Jane Austen. It breaks my heart how many of her letters were burned and destroyed. Sometimes I really do feel grateful for the longevity of internet communications.

Related Post: Sunday 93 – Guns, Atwood, visiting Chicago, etc.

Related Post: Sunday 92 – Tina Fey, sleeping portraits, Kenneth Faried, etc.

4 Comments

Filed under Art, Books, Gender, Hollywood, Media, Politics, Really Good Writing by Other People

Monday Scraps 83

1. GIFTS: After Romney’s post-election definition-of-a-sore-loser quotes about the “gifts” the President gave young people and minorities (Did you know you can buy a 24-year-old’s vote for a couple of months of contraception. TRUE FACT), Jon Stewart shared a few other “gifts.”

2. MORMON: Super excellent piece by McKay Coppins for BuzzFeed on being the sole Mormon reporter on the Romney press bus.

3. MEXICO: What happens to journalism when bribery, threats, and frequent spates of violence directed specifically at the press plague your country? Just ask reporters covering Mexico’s drug wars (NYT Book Review).

4. LANGUAGE: Which words does the NYT use too often? A new internal tool lets the paper (and curious spectators) explore the patterns of language perpetuated and created.

5. HILLARY: Gail Collins + Hillary Clinton = excellent reading. What will Hillary do next? Sleep, aparently, and exercise.

6. DENVER: This is from 2007, but I’m kind of obsessed with Katherine Boo this week, so I’m sharing it anyway. For the New Yorker, she covers the story of Denver’s superintendent and the journey of one turnaround school that couldn’t quite turnaround.

Related Post: Sunday 82: Kevin Durant and the OKC, Rachel Maddow nails it, cute MD photos

Related Post: Sunday 81: Callie Khouri, Anita Sarkeesian, sex surrogacy

2 Comments

Filed under Education, Media, Politics, Really Good Writing by Other People

HuffPo and the Changing Iconograpy of the Abortion Debate

Have you seen the front page of the Huffington Post today?

As of 12:58pm CT

Yowza, kinda smacks you in the face, doesn’t it? I’m not a huge fan of journalistic sensationalism, of which this most certainly suffers, but sometimes the digital equivalent of stomping your feet and screaming at the top of your lungs is necessary.

The lack of a rape exemption is only the most egregious piece of an egregiously sexist platform. The fundamental problem here is that the Republican party (not all Republicans, mind you), does not value the autonomy of women over their reproductive health. You want fewer abortions? Promote comprehensive sex education. Help women afford birth control the way you help old men get erections. Block discrimination against gay and single parents who want to adopt. Give me social services that might actually help me raise a child if I chose to carry to term an unplanned pregnancy. Give me choice and agency.

Do you remember when the established iconography of the abortion debate was the clothes hanger? Neither do I. History books tell me that there was a point when ending back alley abortions and protecting women from harm was a respected goal.  Do you remember when the mental, emotional and physical health of women were prioritized above the potential of a fetus? It was not that long ago.

For those of us born in the 80s, as far back as we can remember, the representative image of the abortion debate has been a bloody fetus. The pro-life movement has been very effective (kudos?) at convincing us all that the question we need to be asking no matter the circumstances of the pregnancy is “what about the baby?” It used to be, “what about the woman?” and the shifting popular imagery illustrates that ideological change.

Mike Huckabee went as far as to call out exemplary Americans who were the results of “forcible” rape, as if their contributions to our culture justified the suffering of their mothers. What about the women that hemorrhaged to death after clothes-hanger abortions? Might they have changed the world for the better? What about teenaged girls who didn’t get a chance at college because no one taught them how to not get pregnant and they were left with no options? Might they have cured cancer or written masterpieces or saved the world? Potential for greatness is not the unique province of unborn fetuses.

Related Post: The Republican Roadmap for Your Reproductive Future.

Related Post: Things that are not the opposite of misogyny.

7 Comments

Filed under Gender, Media, Politics

Guest Post: “Do good journalists report the news or do they make fun of others?”

It’s been a week of awesome guests here at Rosie Says. Ryan on the Slaughter work-life balance article, Alex’ international edition of So What Do You Do Exactly, and now frequent guest-poster Sara on the SCOTUS health care decision and media spin. Remember her? She reads the news a lot and knows more than me and has graciously offered to do the Rosie Says selective-coverage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) decision:

*      *      *      *      *

Like approximately 866,000 other people, I spent the morning glued to the SCOTUSLiveBlog of the Supreme Court decisions, waiting for the ruling on the ACA. Once it came, coverage was fast, furious, and ridiculous. I have a lot of thoughts about the decisions themselves that make me sound like I think I’m a pretentious constitutional scholar, and most of the reading I did was parsing the decision, discussing its impact on things like the Anti-Injunction Act, Medicaid, and future challenges to the Commerce Clause that might make enacting social welfare laws more challenging. But, try as I might, I couldn’t avoid a lot of the meta-analysis. There were two examples that seemed to highlight how utterly focused we are on the things that matter least.

Via foxnews.com

First, Fox News. I don’t make it a habit to visit foxnews.com (actually, if I’m honest, my browser didn’t even fill in the address for me), but I was curious to see how Republicans were spinning this. First, there was the front page (right). Are you a news organization or are you a sarcastic blog? Because “oh, yes it is” would suggest the latter. Twice during the article something is referred to as “so-called” – first the individual mandate and later the contraception mandate. Are the terms really that unknown or uncertain or unestablished that they must be so-called? Are you trying to show me that you don’t accept mainstream media terminology?

Chief Justice Roberts did indeed side with the four more liberal justices in this case, but you wouldn’t know it from this article: “Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., called Chief Justice John Roberts, who sided with the majority, a ‘genius.’ Graham said the law never would have passed if the mandate penalty were presented as a tax, claiming the ruling will redound to Republicans’ benefit.”  What most news outlets reported was that Roberts sided with the four more liberal justices. Here, we get some serious spin claiming that Roberts, by voting to uphold as a tax, has made the law even more unpalatable to Republicans, Pavlovian as they are about not raising taxes. What I fail to understand here is this: the law has already passed. Calling it a tax now can’t make it retroactively less likely to pass.

Lastly, perhaps my favorite line in the article comes at the end, “Obama rattled off several more popular consumer protections in the law in arguing that it’s time to “ ‘move forward.’ ” This part is kind of genius. Notice how they subtly avoid actually saying what any of those consumer protections might be, preventing readers from thinking they might, in fact, like to be protected consumers.

Let’s not forget, though, that however ridiculous Fox might be, pretty much every other news organization got equally unfocused, spending far too much time discussing what everyone I follow on Twitter quickly dubbed #CNNFail. Yes, CNN declared the individual mandate struck down at almost the same moment most other news organizations declared it was upheld. Yes, this is embarrassing, and comparisons to “Dewey beats Truman!” seem apt.

But why are fully half the news stories about who got it wrong, rather than about the ACTUAL NEWS ITSELF? Why do we live in a world where the editor of a major news provider, the Associated Press, has to email his entire staff and tell them to stop taunting CNN immediately? Do good journalists report the news or do they make fun of others? Sometimes I’m frustrated by the way this country is going, and it doesn’t have anything to do with the Commerce Clause.

Related Post: Sara’s guest post on OWS countering my post on OWS.

Related Post: Sara’s guest post on Jezebel’s iffy science coverage.

Leave a comment

Filed under Guest Posts, Media, Politics