10 seconds to midnight

Another great column from my EMT friend. This one concerns a trip to the psych ward at Atlanta’s Grady Hospital with a 400-pound schizophrenic. The ward sits on the 13th floor — no kidding. Here’s a good bit:

As I start my paperwork I ask Albert why now. Why at twenty past eleven in a driving rain has he decided he has to go up to Thirteen?

‘It’s twenty-six past eleven,’ he says.

Fine. Twenty-six, forty-six, a hundred and six. Why now?

‘I can’t listen to them anymore.’

‘You’re hearing voices?’

He nods and bobs his shoulders and the ambulance rocks like a small boat.

‘What are they saying?’

‘Bad things. Mean things. Telling me I ain’t worth nothing.’

‘They telling you to hurt yourself?’

He nods his head and the ambulance crests another wave.

‘They telling you to hurt other people?’

Albert looks away; a nervous child caught lying to his parents.

‘Albert. Are they telling you to hurt other people?’

‘They want me to purge myself. I’m rotting inside and I have to be ripped open so the foul can come out. I have to be relieved of this burden.’

There’s just not a whole lot you can say to that.

‘Huh.’

‘But they want me to wait. To do it at ten seconds ‘til midnight.’

I check my watch. 11:28.

‘You’ll probably still be here then,’ he says. ‘You’ll probably try to stop me. I’ll probably have to kill you.’

The next fifteen seconds pass in silence. Albert, of course, does not sense my unease. That I have picked him up dozens of times in the last several years, that we have talked and joked and extended to one another a certain degree of mutual respect does not, in his mind, preclude sudden senseless violence.

At least he’s given me a warning.

Read the rest.

Understanding the other side

E.J. Dionne eloquently describes the differences between Democrats and Republicans on health care:

Democrats on the whole believe in using government to correct the inequities and inefficiencies the market creates, while Republicans on the whole think market outcomes are almost always better than anything government can produce.

That’s not cheap partisanship. It’s a fundamental divide. The paradox is that our understanding of politics would be more realistic if we were less cynical and came to see the battle for what it really is.

That’s a welcome reminder. It’s not as simple as Republicans are heartless and Democrats are compassionate. There’s a genuine difference in philosophy here. We can’t agree on a solution if we insist on dismissing the other side with a cheap stereotype.

Hilarious exchange between a prof and a student

There’s so much I like about this prof’s response to a student email:

Prof. Galloway,

I would like to discuss a matter with you that bothered me. Yesterday evening I entered your 6pm Brand Strategy class approximately 1 hour late. As I entered the room, you quickly dismissed me, saying that I would need to leave and come back to the next class. After speaking with several students who are taking your class, they explained that you have a policy stating that students who arrive more than 15 minutes late will not be admitted to class.

As of yesterday evening, I was interested in three different Monday night classes that all occurred simultaneously. In order to decide which class to select, my plan for the evening was to sample all three and see which one I like most. Since I had never taken your class, I was unaware of your class policy. I was disappointed that you dismissed me from class considering (1) there is no way I could have been aware of your policy and (2) considering that it was the first day of evening classes and I arrived 1 hour late (not a few minutes), it was more probable that my tardiness was due to my desire to sample different classes rather than sheer complacency.

I have already registered for another class but I just wanted to be open and provide my opinion on the matter.

Regards,
xxxx

—
xxxx
MBA 2010 Candidate
NYU Stern School of Business
xxxx.nyu.edu
xxx-xxx-xxxx

The Reply:

—— Forwarded Message ——-
From: scott@stern.nyu.edu
To: “xxxx”
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2010 9:34:02 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: Brand Strategy Feedback

xxxx:

Thanks for the feedback. I, too, would like to offer some feedback.

Just so I’ve got this straight…you started in one class, left 15-20 minutes into it (stood up, walked out mid-lecture), went to another class (walked in 20 minutes late), left that class (again, presumably, in the middle of the lecture), and then came to my class. At that point (walking in an hour late) I asked you to come to the next class which “bothered” you.

Correct?

You state that, having not taken my class, it would be impossible to know our policy of not allowing people to walk in an hour late. Most risk analysis offers that in the face of substantial uncertainty, you opt for the more conservative path or hedge your bet (e.g., do not show up an hour late until you know the professor has an explicit policy for tolerating disrespectful behavior, check with the TA before class, etc.). I hope the lottery winner that is your recently crowned Monday evening Professor is teaching Judgement and Decision Making or Critical Thinking.

In addition, your logic effectively means you cannot be held accountable for any code of conduct before taking a class. For the record, we also have no stated policy against bursting into show tunes in the middle of class, urinating on desks or taking that revolutionary hair removal system for a spin. However, xxxx, there is a baseline level of decorum (i.e., manners) that we expect of grown men and women who the admissions department have deemed tomorrow’s business leaders.

xxxx, let me be more serious for a moment. I do not know you, will not know you and have no real affinity or animosity for you. You are an anonymous student who is now regretting the send button on his laptop. It’s with this context I hope you register pause…REAL pause xxxx and take to heart what I am about to tell you:

xxxx, get your shit together.

Getting a good job, working long hours, keeping your skills relevant, navigating the politics of an organization, finding a live/work balance…these are all really hard, xxxx. In contrast, respecting institutions, having manners, demonstrating a level of humility…these are all (relatively) easy. Get the easy stuff right xxxx. In and of themselves they will not make you successful. However, not possessing them will hold you back and you will not achieve your potential which, by virtue of you being admitted to Stern, you must have in spades. It’s not too late xxxx…

Again, thanks for the feedback.

Professor Galloway

I’ve sent a few of those — although they’ve been less smarmy and free of vulgarity. Well done, Professor Galloway.

Look no further for the ‘Future of Journalism’

You can find it at ABC News:

“We anticipate that between now and the end of the year ABC News will undergo a fundamental transformation that will ultimately affect every corner of the enterprise,” Westin said.

“The time has come to re-think how we do what we are doing,” he said, adding that ABC News will “dramatically expand” its use of “digital journalists” — reporters who are capable of shooting and editing a story, for example.

Westin also said that weekday and weekend operations for the nightly news broadcast “World News” and the morning program “Good Morning America” would be combined.

“In newsmagazines and long-form programming, we will move to a more flexible blend of staff and freelancers,” he added.

“When we are finished, many job descriptions will be different, different skill sets may be required, and, yes, we will likely have substantially fewer people on staff at ABC News,” Westin said.

Sad, but true — technology is allowing journalists today to do far more with less.

Quick update

The blogging’s been a little light of late. I’m knee-deep in finishing my dissertation prospectus (i.e., half of it). The deadline is next week. I’ll defend it on March 19 followed by a full dissertation defense on April 23. I’ve done much of the work on the dissertation as part of my coursework — hence, the speedy finish.

If all that goes well, I’ll have a PhD in early May. What next? As many of you already know, I plan to be working as a journalism professor somewhere in the Middle East this fall.

Stay tuned…

Plagiarist with a MA in Journalism

Zachery Kouwe resigned from his position at the New York Times this week after being caught lifting passages from other media outlets without attribution. According to one account, he told an editor that citing the source of reporting is no longer important. That’s an incredibly ethically ambivalent statement for any journalist — much less one working at the most prestigious paper in the United States.

A check of Kouwe’s resume discovers that he received a Master’s Degree in Journalism from the University of Colorado – Boulder. A check of their degree requirements finds that media ethics is an optional course. The university — and all journalism programs — should make ethics training a requirement, not an option.

Integrity: Three simple steps

One of my favorite books is “Integrity” by Yale law prof Stephen Carter. In it, he offers three steps to follow to lead a life of integrity:

1) Discern right from wrong. This is harder than it looks because so many of us make decisions without slowing down long enough to discern whether we’re acting within a consistent moral framework.

2) Struggle to live according to the sense of right and wrong you have discerned. This is tough because it could often be time-consuming or expensive. For instance, whenever I park in my downtown Atlanta parking garage, I get a discount because I’m a student. However, the garage asks that I park on one of the top three floors. I’m always tempted to park on a lower level because it’s more convenient. Can’t do that and live in accordance with this principle.

3) Be willing to say what we are doing and why we are doing it. This can be the toughest of all and will often point out that our moral foundation is shaky. (It plays on Kant’s publicity principle.) It’s one thing to take a moral stand, but quite another to so publicly. For instance, I once justified downloading music illegally because the record companies were charging too much per song. That’s a fine moral position — as long as I’ve slowed down and discerned it — but am I willing to tell the record companies that I’m stealing their music? In my case, I had neither discerned the position nor was I willing to announce it publicly.

You should buy the book. It’s a great read — he takes you on a series of ethical propositions and explores each one within this framework. Is it OK to exaggerate on a recommendation letter? Is it cheating for a baseball player to steal signs? Can a politician live in integrity and yet compromise on his principles?

Great questions, and Carter provides some great answers.

Iceland to become journalistic haven

Interesting idea:

On Tuesday, the Icelandic parliament is expected to introduce a measure aimed at making the country an international center for investigative journalism publishing, by passing the strongest combination of source protection, freedom of speech, and libel-tourism prevention laws in the world.

Supporters of the proposal say the move would make Iceland an “offshore publishing center” for free speech, analogous to the offshore financial havens that allow corporations to hide capital from authorities. Could global news organizations with a home office in Reykjavík soon be as common as Delaware corporations or Cayman Islands assets?

“This is a legislative package to create a haven for freedom of expression,” Icelandic member of parliament Birgitta Jónsdóttir confirmed to me, saying that a proposal for comprehensive media law reform will be filed in parliament on Tuesday, and that whistle-blowing specialists Wikileaks has been involved in drafting it.

End of market-based journalism

Great essay from Michael Schudson on the future of journalism — he’s betting on low-profit and non-profit models:

Let me take as my model the online startups that already exist, from TalkingPointsMemo to ProPublica to MinnPost, VoiceofSanDiego, St. Louis Beacon, New Haven Independent, Rustwire, and many more. They are springing up, and growing, and providing effective journalism, including original reporting, and so providing effective models for the future.

Schudson offers six reasons why this model will work:

1) Low overhead: They do not have to invest in a printing press, in paper, or in delivery trucks …  The Internet levels the playing field and nearly eliminates the established newspaper’s competitive advantage.

2) Increased productivity: The productivity of an individual journalist is enormously increased by the Internet and the personal computer … If there had been no recession and if there had been no Craigslist, newspapers would still have cut hundred and likely thousands of jobs because they could have put only the same quality product with fewer people in the newsroom.

3) Information sharing: Online operations have taken on an ethic of sharing rather than an ethic of exclusivity. Sure they want credit for their stories … But they need and use other media to get the stories out. Voiceofsandiego editors appear regularly on commercial television and public radio in San Diego to disseminate their work. It’s advertising and public service all at once.

4) Wider access: The growing availability of relevant data that make first-class journalism more accessible than ever before… Examples: www.foreignlobbying.org (built by two non-profits) and www.OpenCongress.org (formed by conservative thinktank.) … Collaboration is not only in publishing news, then, but even in constructing the data sources that become the raw material that journalists from any news organization can work with.

5) Labor of love: New online operations remind us how important is the resource of obsessive, endless, gritty enthusiasm. Nobody said you have to get rich being a journalist.  … But many worthwhile pursuits endure without a so-called business model. Artists, musicians, dramatists have been doing it for centuries. And so have some journalists, those who set up their alternative weeklies in the sixties, those who worked for political magazines or started vegetarian newsletters or pieced together a living as free-lance foreign correspondents…

6) Non-market solutions: There are non-market ways to assure the survival of worthwhile practices that the marketplace itself can no longer protect… There is no business model for a string quartet, no balance sheet for poetry that doesn’t bleed red, no income streams that can support (the arts) without philanthropic donations. There is no market solution… As with culture and the arts – the universities have and should have a growing role in supporting journalism.

Excellent points. Schudson is one of my favorite academics, by the way. Excluding, of course, any academic on my facebook friends list.

Reviving the Golden Rule

This 10-minute talk from religious historian Karen Armstrong is really worth watching.