--- In [email protected], "gable52556" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm the author of the column in Thursday's Ledger. > <snip> > One person said the column should have included interviews > with people other than university officials who are happy with the > TM movement. I'd like to draw an analogy here. When you read > a story about something the president has done, typically the > reporter will quote the president, a few of his aides, and a few > critics from the Democratic side of the aisle. That way, the > reporter tells both sides of the story. Should every reporter who > writes a story about the president seek out a half-dozen satisfied > Republicans to talk about what a great job they think he's doing?
With respect, that's not such a hot analogy. A more closely parallel story would be one comparing the campaign activities of the Democratic and Republican Parties. In that case you'd quote officials of both parties; or if you were interested in the person-on- the-street angle, voters of both parties; or representatives of all four groups. You wouldn't quote just Republican officials and Democratic voters, or vice-versa. But that's equivalent to what you did in this piece. Granted, this was an opinion piece and not a straight news story, and you were limited in the number of people you could quote. But since the piece took a distinctly anti-TM position, it wouldn't have hurt to bump up the pro-TM representation a bit. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
