I have been properly upbraided, and not defensively so, for citing the Mark Andrew story as "lazy reporting" for clich�d adjectives describing Andrew - and other story figures over time.
I really should have focused on the phrasing and writing, not the reporting. The reporting was quire wonderful, frankly. Mark Andrew is know by many of us as a liberal, and I fall on that side of the line myself, unabashed, as it were. Mark is known to reporters and old party hacks and colleagues as a liberal. The story is a good one, ferreting out as it did the "guy" helped out by a plumber's union official who pled guilty to using union funds to perform work on an elected official's private residence. Important story. Not lazy reporting. Clich�d adjectives come easy after nonstop research and meeting deadlines. I just wish they didn't fall so easily off the tongue and onto the keys for publication. But it's not always the reporters' job to catch them. It's an editor's. So the charge is easily spread around the newsroom. Clich�s are bad enough, but when used in print or broadcast news by reporters, editors, commentators, the effect is to reinforce unnecessary stereotypes. So. I apologize to Steve Brandt and Rocky Olson for implying, even explying, that the story represented lazy reporting. It did not. It was good. Andy Driscoll Saint Paul -------- "The most consistent and ultimately damaging failure of political journalism in America has its roots in the clubby/cocktail personal relationships that inevitably develop between politicians and journalists. When professional antagonists become after-hours drinking buddies, they are not likely to turn each other in." --Hunter Thompson � Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail �� 1973 _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
