Founded as St. Louis Journalism Review in 1970
The unprecedented events in Boston – the lockdown of a major U.S. city during a manhunt for a terrorism suspect – demonstrated the amazing power of the media to help and sometimes hinder a criminal investigation. The manhunt for the Boston Marathon bombing suspects also demonstrated the way in which the media can contribute to, and heighten the frenzy and sense of, danger in a community.
If Joseph Pulitzer could return to Missouri’s state capital, he’d probably recognize a recent development that was familiar during his time: politicians publishing newspapers. At the beginning of this legislative session, Rod Jetton, a former House speaker, launched a startup weekly, the Missouri Times. The newspaper and its website promotion promised “a different kind of media outlet” that would become “Missouri’s newspaper of politics and culture.” The journal’s arrival represented a new phase in the evolution of Missouri government coverage.
Thanks to everyone who participated in Gateway Journalism Review’s survey about online comments for news articles. The first question in the survey asked, “Should news organizations ask for comments about online stories?” and 81.8 percent of the respondents said yes. For this question, one respondent wrote: “I don’t know that they should necessarily solicit comments, but I like the option to comment if I so desire. I often find that the comments, particularly on controversial subjects, to be as interesting and illuminating – if not more so – than the original article.”
During the past three weeks the New York Times published five remarkable articles about America’s economic divide. Together they paint a devastating picture of a country moving inexorably toward a two-tier society in which the rich will continue to get richer while middle-class and-blue-collar workers cling to a life of stagnant wages and high unemployment. Reader response was heavy, on the whole indicting the government in Washington from the 1990s until now as “profit before people administrations.” But no response seems to be coming from the corridors of power in politics, finance and business.
Can anyone post anonymous comments to a website that is privately owned but operates publicly? When media companies provide a platform for online comments, usually at the end of news stories, can anonymous ones be barred when they are racist, hateful, vile, disgusting or uncivilized? The answer to both questions is yes. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment from government interference. But website owners can delete anonymous comments as they see fit. And they generally cannot be held liable for the content of third-party postings. But media companies are trying to identify and curb the small number of so-called online “trolls”’ who seem addicted to attacking anyone – the writers, authority figures and even each other on the same website. These trolls hide behind their anonymity and avoid taking responsibility for what they say.