AJR in the Classroom Discussion questions for the August/September 2004 issue, along with suggestions for further readings:     STORY 1: Low Marks | Story 2: Missed Signals | Story 3: Lagging Behind | Story 4: Watergate   STORY 1: “Low Marks: The public takes a jaundiced view of the nation’s news media, a First Amendment Center/AJR poll finds. More than 60 percent believes making up stories is a widespread problem, and just 39 percent thinks news organizations try to report without bias.” By Paul McMasters   MORE INFO: But the 2004 survey did include some good news: 77 percent said the news media should act as a watchdog on government. And 50 percent said that they have too little information about the government’s war on terrorism—up from 40 percent in 2002.   RESEARCH ASSIGNMENTS/DISCUSSION: How much did the Jayson Blair and Jack Kelley fabrications at The New York Times and USA Today contribute to the current climate of media mistrust? How much of the negative climate existed before these two took major journalistic missteps? Ask students to do some research on Lexis/Nexus to track the public’s perceptions of the media over the last 10 years. They should then report findings back to the class. How is your local TV station doing in its government watchdog role? Ask students to watch a local, nightly newscast for five nights in one week. Ask them to jot down a few words about each story presented, and to note the type of story for each. (Examples: local crime/accidents/fires; politics; features; sports; weather; foreign news.) At the end of the week, have them tally their numbers and report back on how much of the coverage kept tabs on the government. The exercise could be repeated for five days of Metro coverage in a local newspaper. ADDITIONAL READINGS: The First Amendment Center/AJR State of the First Amendment Survey “State of the American Newspaper: Missing the Story at the Statehouse,” by Charles Layton and Mary Walton, from AJR, July/August 1998 “Jack, We Didn’t Know You,” by Gregory E. Favre, on the March 23, 2004, edition of Poynter Online STORY 2: “Missed Signals: Why did it take so long for the news media to break the story of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib?”By Sherry Ricchiardi    QUICK SUMMARY: On Jan. 16, 2004, the U.S. Command in Baghdad released a one-paragraph press release, saying reported incidents of  “detainee abuse” at a Coalition Forces detention facility were being investigated. Yet it wasn’t until three-and-a-half months later that the story made international news, after CBS’ “60 Minutes II” aired graphic photos of Iraqi prisoners being abused. Some say a number of factors contributed to the reporting lag, including dangerous conditions for reporters in Iraq and the challenge of covering the war with a limited staff. But some on the political right say the photos from Abu Ghraib should never have run.   QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION OR FOR ESSAYS: News photos often generate as much debate about journalistic ethics as news stories, particularly those that show people being tortured or killed. What are some of the questions that reporters, photographers and editors should ask themselves before deciding if photos should be published? And once deciding to publish, what additional questions should be considered about photo play (i.e.—does it make a difference if the pictures are used on the front page or home page versus an inside page?) Should the photos from Abu Ghraib have been published? Why or why not? Should they have been published on the front page of newspapers? Why or why not?    ADDITIONAL READINGS: "Handling the Horrible: Dealing With Shocking Images," a free online seminar from The Poynter Institute, May 11, 2004 “Amateur Digital Photos Affect Media Coverage of War,” by Ellen Simon, the Associated Press, May 7, 2004 “Horror Show: The government did not want us to see nightmarish images from Iraq. But with our soldiers and our enemies armed with digital cameras, we can't escape the gruesome realities of war.” By Farhad Manjoo, May 12, 2004, on Salon.com “Arab Media Muted in Coverage of Beheading,” by The Associated Press, May 12, 2004 “Media Missteps: Context gets lost in hysteria and grandstanding,” by Jonah Goldberg, The National Review, May 7, 2004 STORY 3: “Lagging Behind: Fewer than 10.5 percent of the reporters and editors in daily newspaper Washington bureaus are minorities, a new UNITY/University of Maryland survey finds.” By Christopher Callahan   QUICK SUMMARY: That’s a lower figure than previously reported this year by the American Society of Newspaper Editors. A lack of training, development and mentoring for minority reporters were cited as root problems, along with negative perceptions about the Washington beat by minorities. The UNITY/UMD study also concludes that minority reporters and editors in the Washington press corps believe their own bureaus don't do a good job of covering race-related issues. INTERVIEWING ASSIGNMENT/DISCUSSION: About 4 percent of USA Today’s reporters and editors covering Washington are minorities; about 9 percent of The Washington Post’s; about 13 percent of The New York Times’. All three figures are significantly lower than the papers’ newsroom totals for minorities. But even the larger newsroom numbers don’t match the diversity of the papers’ circulation areas. Ask students to call reporters and editors at their local papers, to conduct interviews with both white and nonwhite journalists on ways they think their papers could improve both hiring and retention of minorities. Also ask both the white and nonwhite journalists if they can give examples of stories that could have been covered more fully by their papers, if a more diverse staff was in place. Have students report findings back to the class.   ADDITIONAL READINGS: “What Works?” by Lori Robertson, from the August/September 2004 AJR “Newsroom Employment Census” from the American Society of Newspaper Editors, updated April 20, 2004 “Does your newspaper’s staff reflect the racial diversity of the newspaper it serves?” a May 2004 report for the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, by Bill Dedman and Stephen K. Doig “Mentoring Across Race,” by Mary Sanchez, Aug. 25, 2004, on PoynterOnline     STORY 4: “Watergate Revisited: Thirty years after President Nixon’s resignation, there’s little agreement over just how important a role journalism played in bringing him down. But there’s no doubt the episode had a significant impact on the profession.” By Mark Feldstein   MORE INFO: Some scholars argue that journalists simply prepared the public for Nixon’s removal from office. Or that they helped to keep the story alive by lending legitimacy to government officials investigating the scandal. Others say the episode’s impact on journalism was most strongly felt in the nudge it gave to investigative reporting. Investigative Reporters and Editors, founded the year after Nixon resigned, now boasts 5,000 members.   QUESTION FOR CLASS DISCUSSION OR FOR INDIVIDUAL ESSAYS: What characteristics make a good journalist? The Post’s Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward wore out shoe leather, relied on anonymous sourcing and employed a variety of other reporting techniques in their dogged pursuit of the Watergate story. What do you believe are the most important qualities of a good journalist? Can you give examples of recent stories in which those qualities were on display?   OUT-OF-CLASS ASSIGNMENT: What stories in your local community have been uncovered in the last year through investigative reporting? Ask students to interview local reporters to find out what investigative projects they worked on, how long the projects took to report and write, and what techniques/documents were used to get the needed information. Do they have any tips for young reporters researching nondaily stories?   ADDITIONAL READINGS: “Deep Throat Uncovered,” by The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Department of Journalism “The Post and Watergate,” a 25-year commemorative package on washingtonpost.com “Teaching Notes: Watergate,” on journalism.org “A Study in Mythology: It's been twenty years since the break-in. Did the press really bring down the president? Did Watergate really change the press?” by Michael Schudson, Columbia Journalism Review, May/June 1992   Top of Page  |  Index Page Teachers' guide written by Chris Harvey, online bureau director at the University of Maryland Philip Merrill College of Journalism and former managing editor of AJR. Published Aug. 27, 2004. Copyright © 2004 University of Maryland Philip Merrill College of Journalism. Permission is granted to freely print, for classroom use, up to 100 copies of the most up-to-date version of this document, as long as the document is not modified.