Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Barry / Media State's Best Political Reporters: None Here?
Posted by Bruce Barry on Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:00 PM
The Fix singles out Tom Humphrey of the Knoxville News Sentinel and Richard Locker of the Memphis Commercial Appeal as the state's best. Each is Nashville bureau chief for his paper, so "the best," unsurprisingly, are here in town covering the capital and the Capitol. And to be sure, the Post's methodology, relying in part on reader nominations, lies somewhere between loose and suspect.
Even so, the absence of any print or broadcast reporters affiliated with press outlets based in Nashville -- the state's capital and largest metropolitan area -- raises questions about the health of serious journalism here in Music City. The problem is perhaps more institutional than individual: Nashville has some talented political reporters, but the papers and stations they work for aren't creating the conditions for aggressive, full-time beat coverage of state government and politics.
Comments (34)
Showing 1-34 of 34
I think that Nashville has some excellent political BLOGGERS, but we do have a dirth of actual reporters. Politics at the state and local level don't get NEAR as much coverage as they should, especially in the Nashville media market.
http://tomoveanation.com
like
dislike
A loyal correspondent writes to remind me that when The Fix earlier this year identified the best political blogs in each state (http://tr.im/Afth), the two cited for Tennessee were both Nashville-based. Ok, so it wasn't a loyal correspondent; it was our friend and colleague Kleinheider, whose Post Politics blog was one of the two (Sean Braisted's was the other).
Ok, so it wasn't a loyal correspondent; it was our friend and colleague Kleinheider, whose Post Politics blog was one of the two (Sean Braisted's was the other).
Nice.
The Washington Post can kiss my ass. But I don't think you can conclude much of anything from their little list, Bruce. I've been told to cover government and politics and set loose to do it. What more is a paper supposed to do? If my stories suck, it's my fault.
BB. Glad you noted the story. Tom and Rick deserve the recognition. That they also have been covering state government longer than anyone else explains alot.If Daughtrey were still writing for The Tennessean, he undoubtedly would have been mentioned too. None of the TV or radio stations has a full-time Capitol Hill reporter so they were never in the running. And The Tennessean rotates reporters in and out too quickly for anyone to develop institutional memory.(They ought to move Sisk back to the newsroom, send Schrade back up there and leave him for a few years.)
AP/ I knew Phil West and you are no Phil West .
Woods: No reporters from Chattanooga? What about that fat kid who used to work for Irby?
Marvin: lots of people were on the list, but only one or two can be at the top.
I love how Bruce Barry seems to put more stock in a WaPost blog list, whose "methodology, relying in part on reader nominations, lies somewhere between loose and suspect," than in his own reading of state news coverage. If anything, the fact that Memphis and Knoxville each has only one main statehouse reporter -- as opposed to Nashville's half-dozen -- probably skewed the voting results in their favor. Or hell, just read the coverage. What state stories have Memphis and Knoxville had in recent months that Nashville hasn’t? None.
Barry’s claim that "the absence [from the list] of any print or broadcast reporters affiliated with press outlets based in Nashville -- the state's capital and largest metropolitan area -- raises questions about the health of serious journalism here in Music City" is absurd.
Is Barry so blinded by his slavish devotion to a handful of national media outlets that he no longer possesses the capacity for independent thought and analysis – if he ever had it to begin with? Or maybe he’s just insecure.
" What state stories have Memphis and Knoxville had in recent months that Nashville hasn’t? None."
You're kidding, right? Besides, it's silly to talk about media and cities as synonymous.The KNS and CA routinely break stories that the Tennessean misses or gets around to weeks later. Nashville TV does some good work on investigative stories but doesnt cover the Hill on a regular basis. The AP, of course, distributes to papers statewide. So who are these half dozen Nashville reporters you think match up to Humphrey and Locker? (Ed Cromer perhaps but he doesnt have the readership of a MSM publication.) Yes, BB's portentous observations are based on taking the WP poll a bit too seriously but he hardly deserves your mean spirited and ill-informed attack.
Where is the love for my comrade-in-arms Whitehouse? I think highly of all whose names have been mentioned here, but in terms of quality and quantity of major political stories broken in Tennessee during the past three years, he demonstrably stands apart from the pack.
I nominate Woods for worst political reporter. All he does is defend West End rich folks who hold office. His work on Jim Cooper would suggest he is receiving direct payments from Cooper's office. It is so fawning and lacking in actual reporting that he is an embarassment to the Scene.
I'm still waiting for *somebody* to list all these scoops that Memphis and Knoxville broke that the Nashville press corps missed.
Yeah, Humphries and Locker are great guys and have insititutional memory second to none. But they've been doing the same gig for 30 straight years and it shows in their copy, which can trend to the formulaic and rote.
The Nashville reporters -- at all four papers -- at least bring fresh eyes to the capitol, and that's never a bad thing.
I don't think anyone comes close to my former colleague. While other reporters merely hint at what may or may not be happening--often requiring you to use a decoder to figure out what it is they want to say-, Woods shows you exactly what's going on and who's responsible. And when he's done showing you, he'll tell you. He makes hard, messy stuff simple and fun.
Woods doesn't do anything but shill for the incumbent Democrats like Jim Cooper and Doug Henry. Maybe he likes going to their Belle Meade parties? More advocacy than reporting.
Yep, if I wanted insight into good reporting I'd want to know what Matt Pulle thinks.
Mr. Barry makes a valuable point. While Rick and Tom and Andy Sher of the Times Free Press do an excellent job of covering major issues and providing the context for some events, they are truly the few, the proud, the journalists. Ken Whitehouse also deserves credit for his reporting.
It was not long ago that the News Sentinel and the Commercial Appeal each had two permanent staffers in Nashville. The Tennessean seemed to rotate reporters although a few, like Bonna De La Cruz, did good work. Today the remaining talent is too stretched to get all the key stories but it seems unlikey that they would find the news holes.
Another thing that seperates the best of these reporters from the rest is their fairness. Locker, Sher, Whitehouse and Humphrey are almost paragons of objectivity. Mr. Woods is a talented reporter but it is almost impossible for him to get past his biases. Unlike Larry Daughtery who was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Tennessee Democratic Party, Mr. Woods just smirks and snarks with an elitism that is as breathtaking as it is unjustified.
What? No bloggers?!?!?!?!?
How about the moonbeams like Gold and Braisted, the Paris Hilton and Perez Hilton of the Tennessee blogosphere?
How about the wingnuts like Oatney and Campfeeled?
Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket.
Stacee Campfeeled is the best political reporter in Tennessee.
"The Nashville reporters -- at all four papers -- at least bring fresh eyes to the capitol, and that's never a bad thing."
Suggestion: visit the press room at Legislative Plaza this morning and do a head count. Then tell us how many reporters from Nashville's "four papers" are covering state government.
Attaining a spot on Wash Post's list of select political reporters is IMHO analogus to placing high in a competitive eating contest. Who cares a climaxic crap.
Woods and BB are entertaining to me even though I'm at philosophical odds most of the time with both of them. So was (is) Liz. Keep doing what you're doing boys and girls and I'll keep reading.
And screw Wash Post. The only thing entertaining about them is their colossal pompousness.
Let's start telling a few truths on this thread:
1. Henry is right, go to the press corps pit or roam the halls and see who is actually there doing their job. It would be Locker, Humphrey and Sher. Tennessean and AP? Off and on. Whitehouse rarely darkens the door. Woods comes for the press conferences and follows up on scandals others break. Jeff does KNOW how to report better than that, but let's be honest - working for the Scene doesn't really require it. Reporting on politics and public policy actually requires you to be somewhere in the proximity of where it happens.
2. For those that don't camp out at the Plaza all day, are we getting great reportage from the field? Hardly. The bloggers are doing it from the field, not the main stream press guys allegedly covering politics full-time. Bloggers actually go to party events, fund-raisers, county party dinners, etc. where campaigning and politicking take place. You won't find really anyone on the aforementioned list daring to leave the confines of Nashville unless it is to stray out to Opryland for the Jackson's Day Dinner or Statesman's Dinner.
3. Commentary is much different than reporting. The lines continue to blur. Whitehouse, Woods and many blogs are simply commentary - a rehash of what has already been reported or spinning a press release everyone already has with some under-attributed "anonymous source."
Locker, Humphrey, Sher, Schelzig and the Tennessean (when they make the scene) don't generally opine, they just report. Of course, those on the Right will scream bloody murder about this assessment, but it is true.
Some of the dumping on WashPo here seems a little overwrought (what did Ben Bradlee ever do to your mother?), as does the emphasis on who is consistently visible in the Capitol press room. Covering state politics is about more than covering the state legislature or even state government. And in defense of Woods (who hardly needs me to defend him), some commenters in the thread who are agitated about his reporting and writing style appear to lose sight of the fact that he works (and breaks state political news regularly) for an alt-weekly with a mission and approach rooted in part in advocacy journalism.
Henry. You clownshoe. Where on earth did you get the idea that good reporting happens by sitting behind a desk in an office?
Particularly, sitting in an office in the state legislature when the legislature is out of session? The only reason you see the Memphis and Knoxville guys there every day is because they HAVE NO OTHER OFFICE TO GO TO.
Mr. Barry,
"some commenters in the thread who are agitated about his reporting and writing style appear to lose sight of the fact that he works (and breaks state political news regularly) for an alt-weekly with a mission and approach rooted in part in advocacy journalism."
I will not speak for other commenters but it srikes me that the fact that Mr. Woods writes for a publication which has an agenda that goes far beyond informing readers is a problem.
When a Rick Locker or Tom Humphrey covers a story, I have confidence that their writing will reflect information that accurately covers the major sides and offers information with no regard to the impact on one side or another.
The Tennessean lacks that credibility exactly because we know that the paper has a history of using its news stories to build up or knock down based on the interests of its management. So too with the Scene.
How many times does the Scene expose the ugly side of the interests of those who read alt-weeklys? Your coverage of everything from the health care debate to the convention center to the school rezoning has been one-sided.
Thank-you "Load of Crap" for explaining that you can't effectively cover a beat as complex as state government without being there, every day.The same is true for covering Metro, police, and the courts. Those who think otherwise apparently don't understand how MSM reporters (as opposed to bloggers and opinion writers) do their jobs.
Because of the link on the banner ("Who's the fairest ink-stained wretch of all?"), I totally hoped this was a post about who the best-looking political reporter is. Oh well.
What political reporters..the folks on twitter who re-tweet other folks comments? If they want to be nominated for covering politics...I suggest putting down the damn latte and get out there and actual investigate real issues..instead of coping and pasting from blogs and posting bullshit that has nothing to do with political coverage. Oh don't forget political reporters that have been outed for "forgetting " to report actual political news because they didn't want to report about their friends who made the news.
Let's be honest, bloggers are doing the political reporting because of the void in reporting of facts. Whether we like it or not, the paid folks rarely use their training and we are left sifting through the blogs hoping we find one that sticks to the issues and leave the boiling of frogs type reporting to TV entertainers. The "pasters" occupy seats hiding in corners hoping their lack of reporting will go unnoticed and praying that the guy with the pink slip walk over to the desk next to him/her.
Now, if you want an award for the best political reporter who DONT report political news...I will gladly host that gala.
I long ago gave up on the idea that The Scene was "an alt-weekly with a mission and approach rooted in part in advocacy journalism".
