This has nothing to do with politics, political bias, etc. Just wanted to demonstrate how the zeal for a 'sensational headline' leads to shoddy reporting. Check out the headline, then my bolded areas of the article, and my following questions...

Quote:Teen gets up to 20 years for killing dog with hammer
ASSOCIATED PRESS

A 15-year-old boy who broke into a Kentwood home and killed a family's dog with a hammer has been sentenced to spend up to 20 years in prison.

Jonathan Castelan was sentenced Wednesday in Kent County Circuit Court. He got three to 20 years on a home invasion charge. He pleaded guilty in July.

The Grand Rapids Press reports Castelan used a hammer to fatally bludgeon an 8-pound dachshund named Pinto in May.

In court, Castelan told Abel and Denise Soto's family he hoped they could find it in their hearts "to forgive me for the awful thing I've done."

Abel Soto tells WOOD-TV he believes the sentence was too light.

WZZM-TV says court records show Castelan hit Pinto in the head with a hammer after it bit him.

Link

The reader is left with these questions:

- So was the 20-year sentence for breaking into someone's home or killing the dog or a combination of both? Likely a combination, but it doesn't say how many years for each charge.
- Hammering a dog to death is makes my stomach turn. But the last sentence of the article leaves the article open to some questions... Why did he break into the house? To specifically kill the dog? Or was it for some other reason, and the dog 'got in the way' and started biting him?

This guy seems like a violent delinquent and I'm enjoying the fact that he'll sit behind bars.

But the article really leaves a lot of questions unanswered, not to mention a skewed headline to add more "shock".

And thus the sad state of what passes for journalism today.

It's what a journalism degree has become. It's nothing more then a creative writing degree now with an emphasis on a "good story" and an attention grabbing headline. There is little to no thought put into making sure the story is on point and backed up with verifiable facts. Few bother to present both sides of a given story. Students may be taught the AP writing style, but they don't get taught to seek corroborating sources, or to back up opinion with fact, and worst is the total lack of questioning opinions that are contradicted by the fact (often caused by blindly confusing speculations for facts).

(09-02-2010 09:42 AM)moe24 Wrote:  It's what a journalism degree has become. It's nothing more then a creative writing degree now with an emphasis on a "good story" and an attention grabbing headline. There is little to no thought put into making sure the story is on point and backed up with verifiable facts. Few bother to present both sides of a given story. Students may be taught the AP writing style, but they don't get taught to seek corroborating sources, or to back up opinion with fact, and worst is the total lack of questioning opinions that are contradicted by the fact (often caused by blindly confusing speculations for facts).

True enough.

But isn't anyone else concerned that the guy got 20 years for this? That's extreme.

People receive far less for manslaughter charges.

He got up to 20 years. He'll serve much closer to three.

Let me maybe chime in to the defense of the journalist here. I've mentioned a few times that my neighbor is a pretty well known local MSP reporter. His biggest pet peeve in writing stories for the Strib?

He doesn't write the headline. The headline writers do, often for exactly the sensationalism quoted above.....

Yeah I know, world's smallest violin

(09-02-2010 09:49 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(09-02-2010 09:42 AM)moe24 Wrote:  It's what a journalism degree has become. It's nothing more then a creative writing degree now with an emphasis on a "good story" and an attention grabbing headline. There is little to no thought put into making sure the story is on point and backed up with verifiable facts. Few bother to present both sides of a given story. Students may be taught the AP writing style, but they don't get taught to seek corroborating sources, or to back up opinion with fact, and worst is the total lack of questioning opinions that are contradicted by the fact (often caused by blindly confusing speculations for facts).

True enough.

But isn't anyone else concerned that the guy got 20 years for this? That's extreme.

People receive far less for manslaughter charges.

Yet you continue to post your BLOGS on here. Of course, those are examples of GOOD journalism.

(09-02-2010 10:45 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Let me maybe chime in to the defense of the journalist here. I've mentioned a few times that my neighbor is a pretty well known local MSP reporter. His biggest pet peeve in writing stories for the Strib?

He doesn't write the headline. The headline writers do, often for exactly the sensationalism quoted above.....

Yeah I know, world's smallest violin

Bingo. A reporter also doesn't decide how many lines he gets. In general, the same story will have different headlines in different newspapers, and what lines get cut will be different in each paper.

As best I can tell, the source isn't even a media outlet - it's an entertainment outlet (aka local television news) - so this wasn't even "written" ... it was scribbled in crayon by some monkey in a zoo.

If there is something really pathetic about this story, it's the fact that the AP accepts stories from TV "news" at all.