The Sunspace

The loneliest time I’ve had in my life followed my move from Minnesota to Oregon for graduate school. I arrived in June bursting with anticipation; I couldn’t wait to recreate what I had in Minnesota: an active social life, a cache of loving friends…the elements I thought constituted a comfortable, meaningful existence. By the close of July, I was desperate. It wasn’t that I hadn’t meet good people, it was that I didn’t feel the spark, the intimacy, that I’d grown so accustomed to in Minnesota. I began to internalize the lack of relationships I’d formed and decided that the problem was me. I wasn’t outgoing enough, engaging enough, good enough. But after days and days of alone time, starting then and continuing today, I’ve realized good relationships take time, and in this world of 6 billion people, there’s plenty of potential.

I believe in relationships: my relationships with my friends, my family, my partner, Joe, and, perhaps most importantly, myself. These are the loves of my life. They are the people who have supported me through my worst and celebrated with me at my best. The reverse is also true. But relationships aren’t limited to our closest confidants. I form relationships, however fleeting or meaningful, with the customers I serve at my waitressing job, my partner’s coworkers, the homeless man I offer food to and even the stranger I make eye contact with on the street. Even the relationships we create with nonhumans: our cars, books, pets, and more, can elicit a sense of peace at the end of a hard day or cause grief when lost. Relationships are special, and the evolutionary track of human beings has ensured that our survival, physical and psychological, is dependent on the connections we create.

After excessive contemplation, I’ve come to believe the measure of a relationship isn’t always found in its depth, it also lies in its sense of equity and respect. I think this approach is especially vital to my work as a journalist, and previously my work as a political organizer, because of the sheer volume of contacts made daily and, often, the short period of exchange. Ultimately, I want people to feel good around me, to feel welcome and respected, and I believe my treatment of others reflects my belief in myself.

This I Believe Audio

An interesting aspect of journalism is that its only manual is used almost solely for writing mechanics. Every other facet of a journalist’s job is completely discretionary. Consider the fact that we have tabloid publications that choose to fabricate news. And, most magazines showcase the daily happenings of the insanely rich from Hollywood. These are obviously the most dismal of news providers, but they do tell stories and they do inform people...but with nothing useful. So, the question follows: What's useful news? What should people know...or better, what do they need to know? In Spokane, Wash., two news reporters and the editorial staff of The Spokesman-Review deeply struggled with the possibility of completely destroying the mayor of the city by publically outing him. Mayor Jim West was a former Senate Majority Leader and an outspoken conservative, anti-gay politician for more than 30 years. The reporters' source was an 18-year-old local who said that West had come onto him in a chatroom run by the Web site Gay.com. Whoa. It's enough to make your head spin.

The newspaper decided to hire a forensic investigator, “an expert,” who would take an alias and verify whether two usernames, RightByGuy and Cobra86, indeed belonged to West. They were indeed, and it turns out West would often "reward" those who
would agree to meet him. This fact - that West exploited his position for sex - was the basis for their decision to ultimately publish. And many stories later, the paper earned a Payne award, which honors “the journalist of integrity and character who reports with insight and clarity in the face of political or economic pressures and to reward performance that inspires public trust in the media."

It’s a story onto itself. But the question of when, and why, a newspaper should start snooping around is fundamental. In the case above, the paper decided that only an abuse of power legitimized the story. Morlin, in a U of O class Wednesday, said that the hidden sexual orientation of the mayor was not print-worthy; it was his intention to use his position to essentially elicit sex that was important for the people to hear. I agree with their choice, and I believe their reason why. Only people out for blood would choose to out a man who, I believe, had deep issues about his sexuality. It might be a worthless aside, but Karen Dorn-Steele, the reporter who investigated his politicaly history, said that West had sponsored legislation banned gay men and lesbians from seeking employment in public agencies, such as schools. When Dorn-Steele pressed him on his political decision-making, West said, "If I am gay, it's not wrong for a gay person to be a conservative." It's also not nice.

But that's really not the point. The real issue here is that jouralists must be judicious, always. We possess the power of information, and how we use it affects the community at large profoundly. Even the glut of those ridiculous magazines crowding the grocery aisles influence people. I never feel worse about myself more than when I'm leafing through an "In Touch" magazine while I wait for check out.
Bottom line, news that serves solely entertainment purposes will never fill its audience with power. It just creates victims.

It's an unyielding question: Are bloggers journalists? As always, it depends on whom you ask. My intuition tells they are...sometimes. Do I get a prize for being so decisive?

Before I delve further, I'd like to take a step back and ask why this query is so important. It is a matter of professional esteem? In that case, get off your high horse, paid presspeople. I'm an inclusionist at heart, and I don't find any purpose in practicing pretentiousness. There's plenty of room for everyone.

Is the question instead a warning? Three of three articles I read about this topic referred to a case involving three bloggers and Apple Computer Inc. The bloggers (journalists?) were sued for divulging product information, and they've unsuccessfully attempted to protect themselves by inciting California’s Shield Law, which prevents disclosure of journalistic sources. Professor Philip Meyer, in his article, “What is a ‘journalist’?”, argues that bloggers must seek the same legal protections as paid journalists, who enjoy the comfort of corporate legal teams when slapped with lawsuits. I agree with his advice, and it leads me to believe that if a blogger is offering news information, no matter the haste, intent or quality, she is a journalist. As Slate editor Jack Shafer said, what additional mandate does an aspiring journalist, (like me), have to providing news? I can confidently bet that many bloggers have printed stories far superior than mine, stories that I would undoubtedly benefit from reading.

Bottom line, titles carry weight, but ethics provide the real credibility. Anyone can supply news and call herself a journalist, but the mark of good reporting lies in the methods, discipline and values of the newsmaker. I’ve relied on “Elements of Journalism,” written by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, since my start in this field. It's guided me through the tumultuous realities of writing on deadline, wrestling with focus and striving for objectivity. I believe it’s truth, loyalties and priorities that ultimately deserve merit.

No one, bloggers and journalists alike, should accept laziness.

Philip Meyers article can be found at: www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050331/oplede31/art.htm

Despite my reputation as "bleeding heart," ardent Democrat and unabashed liberal, I'm still undecided on Mexican immigration. My boyfriend is a construction worker, and illegal workers affect his employment. Plus, I see Bush's endorsement of guest-worker programs, and the like, as another boost for big business, and I'm seriously sick of watching our federal government continuously buttress America's richest. Yet, I know these incredibly poor, brave, family-focused illegal immigrants are often assets to the United States, and I think many U.S. citizens, upon reflection, would admire their drive and sacrifice to provide for their families. Bush's Oval Office address Monday night proposed a complete overhaul of immigration, with, according to CNN, emphasis on several key aspects: secure borders, a temporary worker program, holding employers accountable, inroads to citizenship for illegal immigrants and comprehensive legislation.

The first involves deployment of 6,000 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border, which, (perhaps with the return of guardsman from Iraq?), Bush would like to increase to 12,000 to 18,000 by the end of 2008. I’m wondering what orders these Border Patrolmen will receive. Detainment? Death in some cases? The Bush Administration is not known for its leniency.

As mentioned, the essence of the guest worker program pains me. Should we allow employers to seek cheap labor? Perhaps this would push forward a pay standard equal to what U.S. citizens receive. I’d appreciate that.

I fully endorse employer accountability; in fact, I’ve been waiting for Bush to address it. Though I’m not for certain, I don’t think stiff penalties are applied to businesses found guilty of hiring illegal immigrants. According to a story by the Charlotte Observer, not a single employer has been fined for hiring illegal immigrants in at least two years. (http://www.alipac.us/article664.html)
This, of course, is a problem. On the flipside, I don’t know if untrained eyes can catch signs of fake documentation. And how hard should business try to verify what they receive?

On the fourth point, I think that immigrants who have lived in the country for more than 5-10 years and have a clean criminal record should be able to earn citizenship. This means completing the same documentation and tests forced on every immigrant seeking naturalization: proficiency in English and a knowledge of U.S. history and government (though a civics lesson may be good for every American, citizen or not).

And the clincher, federal legislation. This will be the toughest nut for Bush to crack, and ironically, he may require more help from his counterparts than his comrades. In December 2005, House Republicans wrote a bill that imposes criminal penalties for people aiding illegal immigrants, builds 700-mile-long fence across the U.S.-Mexican border and makes unlawful presence in the U.S. a felony. It passed easily. Plus, they’ve dubbed any path to citizenship for illegal Mexicans amnesty. Thus, their resolve may as wide as their proposed fence.

The phrase “drug problem” is as ubiquitous as it is vague. America has had drug problems with just about every drug on the market, legal and illegal. The latest decade-long craze is methamphetamine, and like most drug problems, unraveling why it happened, how to track it and how to stop it are society’s lasting conundrums. But journalist Steven Suo found a way. He started with a comparison of rehab entrants state-by-state and, after noticing Oregon ranked number one, embarked on a 2-year investigative journey that has garnered attention and action from the United States Congress, the Mexican government and the United Nations.

Listening to him tell the story, you might think he’s a bit burnt out. In total, he’s written a five-part series for The Oregonian, his employer, traveled the world and analyzed figures regarding emergency room visits, property and identity theft crimes, rehab visits and drug purity. Such a glut of activity would fatigue anyone. His work, however, produced results that makes breathing easier for anyone connected to the meth epidemic (except for users and dealers). He found how to decrease consumption dramatically and keep it low. The solution isn’t novel: simply choke the supply.

Eighty percent of meth is produced in “super labs” located in California. In other words, while stories of small-time producers is true - one of meth’s odious qualities is how “easily” it is to produce from homes - the bulk of manufacturing takes place on the West Coast. Its chief agent is pseudo-ephedrine, an ingredient in common cold medications. Only nine factories in four countries, none being the U.S., produce ephedrine/pseudo-ephedrine, which means that actions that stifle the exportation of the ingredient stifle meth suppliers.

Simple, no? Restrict the supply of ephedrine, and meth dealers close shop. Suo found that when ephedrine was more heavily regulated in the mid-90s, ER rooms saw fewer meth overdoses and accidents, property crimes decreased, rehabilitation centers greeted fewer meth addicts and drug purity decreased. These all indicate a decrease of the drug overall. So why doesn’t Congress impose tight restrictions? Please enter pharmaceutical companies.

Cold medication sales total $3 billion annually, and according to pharmaceutical companies, regulation is a slippery slope that, at its worst, could mean the end of ephedrine in the U.S. Alternatives that don’t include ephedrine have been developed but not marketed because producers say that they don’t surpass what’s already available (in terms of efficacy)? May I scream, please?! Why does private interest so oftern trump public interest?

That’s a rant for another day. Bottom line, Suo found definitive answers through exhaustive research, and governments have answered. While ephedrine supply is restricted, pseudo-ephedrine is not, and drug dealers have persevered for now. But Suo’s work has provided lessons for future journalists: tackle big problems, practice skepticism, don’t relent and don’t be afraid. You may help end someone’s drug problem.

Expectations can be scary when talking about sex. How much does one really want to know about the sexual preferences, habits and perspectives of others, especially when they deviate from the norm?

Young Benoit Denizet-Lewis, a Frenchman/Californian, is not afraid. In fact, he’s eager to share and learn. A writer for The New York Times Magazine, Jane, Salon and more, he’s pursued stories about teenage promiscuity and bisexuality; married black men on “the Down Low,” i.e. having homosexual sex; gay men and lesbians defying their norms; and even the angst of living on a street called Gay. They are stories of the 21st century. Are you ready for this?

Denizet-Lewis argues that journalism cannot confine itself to stories about pedophilia and sexual predators it if seeks to provide a holistic picture of sexuality in America. His stories are as captivating and important as any Nightline news broadcast, so his point is well taken. Especially shocking are his findings on teenage sex, which, by his accounts, does not mirror the innocent wonderings remembered by past generations. Aided by the Internet and increased freedom of expression, our youngest may be sexually sharper than we.

“We’ve got 12-year-olds masturbating to Internet pornography….” he said. “There’s no real intimacy. I think there is real damage that happens there.”

One interpretation is that teenagers are more flippant and dismissive of healthy sexual habits. Denizet-Lewis found that adolescent women are seeking sexual relationships without emotional attachments – in one form, this means meeting partners on the Internet exclusively for sex – which any woman with experience knows is often an empty, painful road. Internet porn provides more salacious content than former Playboy addicts can imagine…and increasingly difficult standards for young women to meet. And please don’t pigeonhole yourself to a particular sexual preference. It’s so uncool.

Can these youth successfully disregard everything we understand about healthy sexual relationships in perpetuity? Denizet-Lewis doesn’t comment. He’s certainly expecting a sexual revolution, led by America’s non-conformist youth, which shuns labels and, perhaps, intimacy. On its flip side, it’s helping gay adolescents avoid the closet.

Any parent who is privy to Denizet-Lewis’ writing experience should infer an important message: Talk to your children about sex and about the Internet. Denizet-Lewis’ weekend workshop about addiction should also encourage parents to arrange a conversation about drugs. Is encouraging abstinence a fruitful pursuit? Maybe, but it certainly can’t stand alone. Parents need to get a better grip on what their children are accessing and be upfront early about the dangers of risky behavior. Baseline knowledge of condoms and birth control are essential, as is the joy of warm, trusting relationships. For more information on Mr. Denizet-Lewis, visit http://benoitlewis.com/.

In his book “We the Media: Grassroots Journalism: By the People, For the People,” Dan Gillmor states, “When anyone can be a writer, in the largest sense and for a global audience, many of us will be.” He was right. In an article published by Quill Magazine in March 2005, Andrew Smales, a Toronto-based programmer who launched the first broad-based blogging tool in 1999, said, “There were less than 100 people when it started. Now 100 people probably sign up every hour.”

It’s something like a phenomenon.

Really, it’s quite extraordinary that such a powerful tool is at so many people’s fingertips. Angry about Bush administration policies? Blog it. Want to create a niche community for kayaking crazies? Blog it. Really, anyone can start a blog for any reason without great effort. Of course, applying standards to such an unfettered system is a separate challenge.

The real debate lies here. Mainstream journalists are feeling skittish about sales, and a proliferating medium that is not harnessed by journalistic ethics or teachings, but is packaged a news source, is understandably frightful. Not everyone is pessimistic though, and as two poynter.com articles point out, both sides could benefit from some cross-dressing and education.

Journalism’s core principles: truthfulness, relevance, timeliness, etc. cannot be ignored by blogging gurus. In fact, if bloggers intend to remain important to news readers, it must abide by the rules of the journalistic trade. As many news organizations are discovering, quality yields quantity (of readers), and though bloggers are not impacted by market share, to really be useful to society they must care for their content. This means avoiding a glut of journalism no-no’s, such as anonymous sources, a lack of sources, corporate bribes and careless reporting.

Traditional news, in contrast, could also learn a lesson or two. In my opinion, the most important is forming better relationships with readers. Blogging offers an empowering opportunity for readers and reporters to converse, an opportunity rarely available to practicing journalists. This is blogging’s beautiful gift. What a wonderful chance to learn and be impacted by an audience daily. And what a wonderful way to get to know them too.

I think Steve Outing put it best: “Bloggers and mainstream journalists likely won't end up as twins, but perhaps cordial cousins.”

Outing’s two worthy reads:
http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=75383
http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=75665

"My opinion matters." I think that's the first belief a blogger embraces. Really, it's the epiphany every writer experiences before she or he can commit to public self-expression. Exposing oneself is needless otherwise. Personally, I never imagined that I would one day blog. I’ve beaten the confidence barriers, for the most part, and I care about the happenings of our world. But blogging requires additional commitment – of time, to quality – that I fear I’m not willing to give at present. Who knows, maybe I’ll fall madly in love with this medium and it won’t be the effort I expect. But worthwhile ventures require strain and sweat and resolve to be fruitful, and, regardless, this class will ensure that I remain disciplined enough to make my blog credible news, with the qualities relevance, timeliness, quality, diversity and receptivity. I wouldn’t fulfill my journalistic duty otherwise.