Mike, You watch The Wire on HBO? Some good newspaper plots this season. Sucks this is the last season.
[QUOTE=Normmm;293869]Mike, You watch The Wire on HBO? Some good newspaper plots this season. Sucks this is the last season.[/QUOTE]
I don’t watch it, but friends in the business who do complain it’s not realistic. The depiction of lower standards of journalism because of budget cuts are unrealistic, they say. You might not fly to New York to do a story now, but fairness and accuracy shouldn’t suffer.
It is exaggerated. They exaggerate every aspect of the show; the police, mayor, DA, schools, hospital, gangs. I feel bad for the city of Baltimore. They really make it appear like a totally ***tty place to live. Makes for good drama though.
I would not want them to use the Observer for a similar “drama,” but through that lens you’re probably right – good TV, not necessarily reality.
Has anyone else written any “editorials” to the Observer in response to the story on Friday/Spangler (being anti-football for Charlotte) last week? I sent one in a couple days ago, and of course it hasn’t shown up yet! If others have sent similar ones and none have been printed, I think it shows a clear “bias” on the Observer’s part (as if any more evidence was needed, right)!
[QUOTE=919R;296980]Has anyone else written any “editorials” to the Observer in response to the story on Friday/Spangler (being anti-football for Charlotte) last week? I sent one in a couple days ago, and of course it hasn’t shown up yet! If others have sent similar ones and none have been printed, I think it shows a clear “bias” on the Observer’s part (as if any more evidence was needed, right)![/QUOTE]
Letters to the Opinion section are handled by the editorial board, which is separate from the newsroom. They get hundreds a day, pick the best. I am not part of that process.
Letters to the Opinion section are handled by the editorial board, which is separate from the newsroom. They get hundreds a day, pick the best. I am not part of that process.
Mike, I realize that and this was not directed at you. However, since you commented, do you not think its a little suspicious that not a single rebuttal has been posted since this article was printed over a week ago? I know now that quite a few have been sent in. Can you say agenda??? Mary Schulken (and/or her boss) wouldn’t happen to be on that editorial board now would they?
[QUOTE=919R;297588]Mike, I realize that and this was not directed at you. However, since you commented, do you not think its a little suspicious that not a single rebuttal has been posted since this article was printed over a week ago? I know now that quite a few have been sent in. Can you say agenda??? Mary Schulken (and/or her boss) wouldn’t happen to be on that editorial board now would they?[/QUOTE]
Dunno. You can ask the editor of the letters. His name is Lew Powell, lpowell@charlotteobserver.com. My guess is he’ll tell you he gets hundreds of letters a day (and he does) and that none of those made the cut. You can see the typical length – 150 words or less. If your response was longer and not easily edited, that could be part of the problem.
Also, if you e-mailed a letter, it should have been to opinion@charlotteobserver.com, not Mary herself. And it should include your address and daytime phone number.
Dunno. You can ask the editor of the letters. His name is Lew Powell, [EMAIL=lpowell@charlotteobserver.com]lpowell@charlotteobserver.com[/EMAIL]. My guess is he'll tell you he gets hundreds of letters a day (and he does) and that none of those made the cut. You can see the typical length -- 150 words or less. If your response was longer and not easily edited, that could be part of the problem.Also, if you e-mailed a letter, it should have been to opinion@charlotteobserver.com, not Mary herself. And it should include your address and daytime phone number.
150 words or less (very succinct, but not overly rude) and sent to “opinion…” email address.
Note: I’ve sent several editorials in over the years (atleast 3-4) and everyone made it in within a few days.
Any truth to the rumor that Sorensen will take on Spangler, Friday and the entire UNC system this week?
[QUOTE=LeftyNiner;298804]Any truth to the rumor that Sorensen will take on Spangler, Friday and the entire UNC system this week?[/QUOTE]
Dunno. He has the flu. I’ve tried to leave him alone to get well.
Any truth to the rumor that Sorensen will take on Spangler, Friday and the entire UNC system this week?
LETS GO
[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger;297618]Dunno. You can ask the editor of the letters. His name is Lew Powell, [/QUOTE]
disclaimer: I have no connection to or likeness with this particular Lew. I do not claim or impersonate him in any way, shape, form, or fashion. Any similarities are purely coincidental.
But if I was that Lew, all of your letters would be on the front page.
[QUOTE=zerogeneticsdc]LETS GO[/QUOTE]
That’s two of us. Sorensen, we’ve got your back.
MIke, is it safe for us to assume the O’s official stance is against football since our rebuttal letters are not being published? This entire situation is pretty sad if you ask me. it also speaks very negatively of your paper.
[QUOTE=Chipper;298974]MIke, is it safe for us to assume the O’s official stance is against football since our rebuttal letters are not being published? This entire situation is pretty sad if you ask me. it also speaks very negatively of your paper.[/QUOTE]
They published one, as I mentioned and linked Friday. That’s about all you can expect, and it summed up the general thoughts of the board.
The editorial board is separate from the newsroom. I have no influence there, and they have none in my department. Their “official” stance could be 180 degrees from Tom Sorensen’s or Scott Fowler’s, and they are the two who would write opinion pieces on this for sports. I think Tom has generally been supportive of the effort.
Here’s the link and the letter they ran on the editorial page:
http://www.charlotte.com/opinion/story/504232.html
UNC Charlotte deserves quality football program
I was taken aback by the reservations expressed by C.D. Spangler and William Friday regarding UNC Charlotte’s pursuit of a football team (Feb. 15, “Spangler, Friday down on football”).
UNCC is an academic institution worthy of a quality football program, and I applaud the university’s leadership for continuing to study the topic. A football program would be a catalyst for bringing students and alumni together. It would also benefit the greater Charlotte community.
Michael Morris
Charlotte
They published one, as I mentioned and linked Friday. That's about all you can expect, and it summed up the general thoughts of the board.The editorial board is separate from the newsroom. I have no influence there, and they have none in my department. Their “official” stance could be 180 degrees from Tom Sorensen’s or Scott Fowler’s, and they are the two who would write opinion pieces on this for sports. I think Tom has generally been supportive of the effort.
Here’s the link and the letter they ran on the editorial page:
http://www.charlotte.com/opinion/story/504232.html
UNC Charlotte deserves quality football program
I was taken aback by the reservations expressed by C.D. Spangler and William Friday regarding UNC Charlotte’s pursuit of a football team (Feb. 15, “Spangler, Friday down on football”).
UNCC is an academic institution worthy of a quality football program, and I applaud the university’s leadership for continuing to study the topic. A football program would be a catalyst for bringing students and alumni together. It would also benefit the greater Charlotte community.
Michael Morris
Charlotte
…and just below that one was one arguing against football for “academic reasons…blah, blah, blah”…As someone above asked, I’d say its pretty clear where the Big O’s “editorial” board stands on the issue!:unhappy:
[QUOTE=919R;298982]…and just below that one was one arguing against football for “academic reasons…blah, blah, blah”…As someone above asked, I’d say its pretty clear where the Big O’s “editorial” board stands on the issue!:unhappy:[/QUOTE]
That was the last letter that day. I have no idea what you’re talking about.
That was the last letter that day. I have no idea what you're talking about.
Mike, I live in Union County and on my editorial page (whatever day it was, Friday or Saturday) there was a letter right beneath it that was anti-football. It said something about we should spend that money on … (some academic department, I can’t remember which) …I remember because I was rolling my eyes at it and was thinking, of course since they finally put in a pro-football letter, they had to be sure to put in an anti-football one as well!
Maybe, it was a different day, but the pro-football one I saw seemed the same as the one you posted above.
[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger;298977]They published one, as I mentioned and linked Friday. That’s about all you can expect, and it summed up the general thoughts of the board.
The editorial board is separate from the newsroom. I have no influence there, and they have none in my department. Their “official” stance could be 180 degrees from Tom Sorensen’s or Scott Fowler’s, and they are the two who would write opinion pieces on this for sports. I think Tom has generally been supportive of the effort.
[/QUOTE]
Mike, why don’t you run letters in the Sports section? I don’t see any letters, yet you advertise the email daily.
[QUOTE=LeftyNiner;299000]Mike, why don’t you run letters in the Sports section? I don’t see any letters, yet you advertise the email daily.[/QUOTE]
We run the ones we get. If you send them to opinion, I never see them (remember, opinion is separate from the newsroom). If you send them to our e-mail, we consider them for sports.
I think at this point we should be past the Friday/Spangler episode and on to something new. It’s pretty clear their thoughts didn’t gain much traction either inside or outside the university.