Blogs from the Symposium

News? - Breaux Symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

The panelists talked about the blurred lines of journalism and news commentary. Do the consumers really know the difference? This is interesting in terms of what an informed consumer really is. Those who consume the news on a routine basis may know the difference. But the same may not be true for other news consumers. So is it the responsibility of media outlets to distinguish who they are and what they are trying to get across to consumers? This is a difficult question to answer because most would assume that it is the responsibility of consumers to make sure they know the difference. So in whose hands does the burden lie?

Diverse sources for consumers
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

One panelist touched on the issue of consumers relying on mainstream media for their information and missing the other media outlets that can provide different perspectives on political issues.

The world is becoming more and more diverse, but consumers seem to rely on mainstream media for reliable information. Do consumers lack trust in diverse and ethnic media? Are they clinging to traditional news sources in a world that is clearly moving in an non-traditional direction?

But this all stems from consumers wanting easily attainable information without having to look in too many places to get that information. People tend to lean on the sources that most people go to and do not seek out other sources . But consumers may be missing out on getting multiple perspectives on certain issues because of their skeptism of competing media outlets. So how can the media counter the arguments that consumers only trust certain news sources? Will it take maintstrem media teaming up with non-traditional media outlets for consumers to get big picture about their presidential candidates? It’s unlikely. But it could work.

Damaging the voting process - Breaux symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

One panelist brought up the issue of marginalizing some candidates by calling other candidates front runners. Is this damaging to the voting process? Voters living in a democracy believe they can vote for anyone they want to. But is this process working for the voters when the media filters out the candidates for the voters? The same presidential candidates’ names show up in the media often leaving the voters to believe these candidates are the only ones who are worth voting for. The media are somehow making decisions for the voters by shedding the light on what they call the “front runners.” But how can the media take the filtering out of their coverage and give consumers access to all the candidates? This proves difficult when consumers rely on the media to filter their information. Journalists have to find a way to present information about presidential candidates without taking away their right to know everything. But consumers also have to take the responsiblity to seek out those news sources that give them thorough and accurate information.

Presidential Debate Format
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

Marc Cooper brings up a very good point.  He says he wants to see debate formats where candidates truly get to debate each other (asking each other questions, rebutting, etc.) instead of giving run-around answers from the questions posed by moderators.

I think from an entertainment standpoint, this would be fantastic.  Seeing John Edwards and Hillary Clinton going at each other over health care, or Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney talking about religion, would be infinitely better than the current format of having them waffle and beat around the bush … or as we have seen by Wolf Blitzer, hand-raising.

From an issue standpoint, it COULD be good. But if people begin focusing too much on how a candidate compares to another (height, eye contact, facial expressions, etc.) I think it could detract from what they’re really saying. But then again, I suppose anything that’s televised would do that anyway, so perhaps it would be an improvement.

Unanswered Questions - Breaux Symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

After a brief break, the panelists returned to explore questions that they would like to ask the candidates but are not likely to be addresses:

Is there anything that they would not do to be elected president ?
Ask the candidates other than Obama, why they are not black enough?
Ask the Democrats how they will counter the perception that a Republican candidate would make the country safer?
When do you pray? How do you pray ? Do you only pray when you are in trouble?
Do they believe U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East will increase terrorism in the future?
Are you going to continue to fund or defund the war when it comes to deploying the troops?

TV=quality? - Breaux Symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

Consumers, in many cases, are putting down there newspapers and picking up their remotes to get the news and information they need. But some panelists question whether television is where consumers should go to really get the information they need. It all goes back to whether consumers are being informed or entertained. Are televsion stations selling consumers out for commercial purposes? Each medium is essentially a business. But how are the media giving sustaining their businesses and maintaining useful coverage?

Help the consumers out - Breaux Symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

Panelists brought up the issue of how the media are helping the consumers get what they need. Media outlets are flooding consumers with information. How can consumers narrow things down? This is an interesting point. This is an issue that is particularly prevalent among young news consumers. They don’t know where to begin in a time when information can be attained just about anywhere. The public has a responsibilty to inform themselves. But when it comes down to it, consumers really want the media to filter the information for them. Consumers want easily attainable and trustworthy information. The information is already there, but the media has to figure out what they can do to attract consumers and keep them anchored in the information. The hard part is getting a strategy that will work to get most consumers on the same page. But there is no one main strategy to attract so many consumers. So what can the media do? Several panelists said the strategy has to change according to the situation. This could work as long as the media know when to make the necessary shifts.

Continuing — Breaux Symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

From what I’m hearing, the main issue of information availability is not the lack thereof but the choices therein.  Internet archives of news stories about policy issues can be found even if they aren’t paid attention to initially.

But how do news consumers know which ones are telling the truth? On the issue of immigration, how can I trust a candidates’ Web site to tell me what he stands for? Won’t there inevitably be a commercial saying “So-and-so says he’s for strong border security, but his vote on ____ tells a different tale?” How can I say for sure — without reading the bill that was voted on and looking at the roll call — who is right and who is wrong? Or more accurately, who is putting it in context and who isn’t?

Information proliferation is good, but now there is a glut of things to take in, and people don’t have time to do it. Sometimes newspapers do their jobs by whittling the info down into something digestible, but sometimes they simplify things to such an extent that the “sound-bite” must be provided by the candidates to make sure news stories make the points they’re trying to make.

If the sound-bites are what remains of a 1 hour speech, then in the larger scheme of things, what incentive do the candidates have for providing anything else but that?

Filtering the wants from the needs. - Breaux Symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

Are the media covering what the citizens really need to know about the election? Are the sensationalized stories about Hilary Clinton’s cleavage more important than what she stands for? People look to media outlets for the information but are often given the stories that are more interesting instead of what is really important to know. So how do the consumers use the tools that are supposed to inform them instead of entertain them? It might seem like consumers clearly know the difference between entertainment and relative presidential campaign information. But the question is whether consumers are getting enough of the later.

Continuing — Breaux Symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

Panelists are now discussing some of the ways media can adequately cover issues and what voters are thinking.

Generation differences seem to play a large role in how people digest media and how candidates use them.  Younger people and younger journalists use myriad different types of media to transmit/cover messages, and thus the role of individual journalists is diminished.

The resources of the media, in earlier days much larger, has dwindled to where newspapers/television stations cannot cover each and every story, campaign, and so on. So it’s important to be able to focus on what really matters, and sifting through all the noise to find what really matters to voters is a great challenge.

Perhaps the media, on Mr. Shribman observes, should learn about the issues of each state, each industry, and then use that knowledge to make sure candidates are covering those issues. Instead, typically media simply covers what candidates are saying and doing, without the context of how it affects different places, people, and industries.

What issues need to be discussed right now in the news?
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

The panelists ran down a list of things that should be covered in the presidential election. A question one panelist posed is who are the presidential candidates? What do they stand for? This is an interesting point. Do the voters really know who they are voting for? Could lack of knowledge for some people lead to voter apathy? Campaign finance is one issue a panelist said the media companies need to keep track of. Campaign finance has been heavily covered topic in the news. But does campaign finance coverage help consumers know who they need to vote for? One panelist said No Child Left Behind Act is an unresolved education issue. So do the candidates know how they will resolve this and get provide citizens with the education they need? Education is the foundation for those who go out into the workforce and has influence on how our country competes against other countries. The negative perception of our country is one thing a panelist said the media and presidential candidates need to pay attention to. The next president will have to deal with whatever issues President Bush left behind. So are they ready for to deal with this? A panelists said the media need to concentrate on the voters because this seems to be what is the most important. What do they want or need? Stories have to get to the root of what voters want to know to make the most of coverage.

Beginning the Breaux Symposium
Thursday, November 8th, 2007

Kicking off the Symposium, panelists are discussing the 2008 presidential race — how can change be enacted, how do generational and ideological splits affect each party and each candidate, how our country’s energy needs can be satisfied, how education (and specifically No Child Left Behind) policy is not being addressed by anything but lip service by the candidates, and how real issues of immigration — beyond the demagoguery of hate — both legal and illegal, shapes the landscape of labor and wages.

Other topics include the aging of the population, especially with regard to entitlements like Social Security and Medicare; the need for health insurance and the government’s role in it; the inevitable discussions about the Iraq War; the shifting political tectonic plates with the end of the Reagan era and how Democrats can, or cannot, take advantage of that ending; why the voters are far more interesting than the candidates; the Israeli and Palestinian conflict; why the Russians might re-emerge as a hostile country; and finally, protectionism vs. free trade.

Quite an exhaustive and comprehensive list. But how can the candidates possibly address all these issues when the media is focusing on John Edwards’ haircuts, Hillary Clinton’s cleavage, Fred Thompson’s young wife, etc.

Breaux Symposium Tomorrow
Wednesday, November 7th, 2007

Tomorrow morning, LSU’s Manship School and the Reilly Center will be hosting the Breaux Symposium, which will bring together members from various media groups to discuss how the media can interest more people in politics — especially the 2008 presidential race.

A student panel including Daily Reveille employees Shay Randle (contributing writer) and myself will ask questions of the panelists with a particular emphasis on how media can interest students and young people.

The Breaux Symposium will be held in the Holliday Forum of the Journalism Building. It begins at 8:30 a.m. and will last until noon.

Check back tomorrow for more coverage and living blogging from the event.

9.27.07 by Bob Mann
Citizens want to be more involved in politics and public affairs.  But it seems that elections or debates over important issues often alienate more voters than they engage.  That’s because voters often feel  neglected or abused by political operatives who devote more time to manipulating public opinion than engaging them in meaningful, constructive dialogue.  I hope this symposium will provide some of the dialogue about politics that we desperately need. More important, I’m hoping that we’ll come up with some practical strategies for making elections a true conversion among voters, the media and the candidates.

9.25.07 by John M. Hamilton, Dean of the Manship School of Mass Communication
"In addition to turning out superior journalism students, it is also vital that our school play a leadership role in ensuring that news consumers possess the critical thinking skills necessary for an engaged and democratic society."

9.23.07 by Adrienne Moore
What we are trying to do is create a resource for consumers to use during the 2008 election.  So much of the coverage is focused on who's ahead rather than on pertinent policy issues that connect the public to government.  Our goal in bringing these nationally recognized people together is to provide a useful tool for democratic action.