On Friday, my colleague Ryan wrote up what was wrong with the insta-coverage of Cramer v. Stewart (Last Thursday Night’s Edition), including what Ryan called the “superficial” take by New York Times TV critic Alessandra Stanley. For a thoughtful take by another TV critic, have a look at this blog post by Time’s James Poniewozik, who found the Stewart-on-Cramer interview “most fascinating as a discussion about how business journalism in particular and journalism in general are done in America,” and highlights “a few of Cramer’s responses” which he found “especially eye-opening, not just as they relate to business news but to problems that journalism has generally.” Worth a read.
04:26 PM - March 16, 2009
Time For One More Cramer/Stewart Analysis?
It doesn’t add up - A science writer questions the conventional wisdom of US-born STEM workers
#Realtalk: Dear reader - For small sites, loyalty might be a better path to pageviews
Falling for internet hoaxes - Some people who share satire don’t realize they’re missing the punchline
Digital First plans layoffs (Updated) - High-level executives and high-profile digital projects targeted
‘Nobody’s that lucky’—except in Florida’s lottery? - Palm Beach Post ferrets out lottery fraud, prompts tightening of “meager” safeguards
Email blasts from CJR writers and editors
The future of the social network is apps—lots and lots of apps
A linguistics analysis suggests that Nick Szabo, a well known name in cryptography circles, is the mysterious father of the digital currency
“I urge you to go to your reporters and engage in serious self-examination”
How war has made the world safer and richer
Despite the bridge scandal, Chris Christie’s state is relatively transparent and accountable. CJR’s Greg Marx talks to Gordon Witkin
Who Owns What
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.