Comments on: Bill Clinton Didn’t Punch Barack Obama in the Face http://pjnet.org/post/1720/ Public Journalism Network Fri, 05 Dec 2008 16:01:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Will Riley http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-4048 Will Riley Fri, 08 Feb 2008 07:36:53 +0000 http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-4048 To get the tribal fires blazing, we first need to give our people names. Bill Clinton has a name. Everyone at the rally came to define that name with a face and a voice and body language. Fewer people came to see the man introducing Bill Clinton or the smiling woman staring at him. For most people, that man was just a messenger, an anonymous proxy for the mythological image of Bill Clinton, and that woman was just a fan who was trying to reconnect. So if we want to be a tribe, we first need to know each other's names. Imagine a mediated game where we have to learn each other's names. Let it start offline and move online. Maybe it's a game, where we can give each other names. People bring audio recorders and digital cameras. They walk around the rally interviewing each other. Then they jump online to post pictures and name each other. The stranger with the giant Clinton sign would be called Big-Sign-No-Mind, and maybe the dour lady who doddled too long in the restroom would be She-Had-Too-Little-Purpose. But we would want to earn better names than these. So we would have to meet each other and ask tough questions. What about the woman who asked the tough question to Clinton. She might be called, She-Asks-Why-You-War. And when the man on stage gives his answer, we call him, He-Who-Half-Answers-From-The-Pulpit. Maybe the heckler is called, You-Are-Brave-But-Speak-Louder. We need names before we can dance around the fire. We need names to tell stories. We need to be the Tribe-That-Names-It-All. To get the tribal fires blazing, we first need to give our people names. Bill Clinton has a name. Everyone at the rally came to define that name with a face and a voice and body language. Fewer people came to see the man introducing Bill Clinton or the smiling woman staring at him. For most people, that man was just a messenger, an anonymous proxy for the mythological image of Bill Clinton, and that woman was just a fan who was trying to reconnect.

So if we want to be a tribe, we first need to know each other’s names. Imagine a mediated game where we have to learn each other’s names. Let it start offline and move online. Maybe it’s a game, where we can give each other names. People bring audio recorders and digital cameras. They walk around the rally interviewing each other. Then they jump online to post pictures and name each other.

The stranger with the giant Clinton sign would be called Big-Sign-No-Mind, and maybe the dour lady who doddled too long in the restroom would be She-Had-Too-Little-Purpose. But we would want to earn better names than these. So we would have to meet each other and ask tough questions.

What about the woman who asked the tough question to Clinton. She might be called, She-Asks-Why-You-War. And when the man on stage gives his answer, we call him, He-Who-Half-Answers-From-The-Pulpit. Maybe the heckler is called, You-Are-Brave-But-Speak-Louder.

We need names before we can dance around the fire. We need names to tell stories. We need to be the Tribe-That-Names-It-All.

]]> By: Vincent G. Thomas http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-4014 Vincent G. Thomas Wed, 06 Feb 2008 06:24:21 +0000 http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-4014 I recall when Clinton got upset with Jerry Brown during a debate and looked like he was going to deck him over a remark Jerry made about Hillary's role in a law case. Bill moved towards him him wagging his finger and getting red in the face. I expect Clinton is going to do get angry more than once by November. I recall when Clinton got upset with Jerry Brown during a debate and looked like he was going to deck him over a remark Jerry made about Hillary’s role in a law case. Bill moved towards him him wagging his finger and getting red in the face.
I expect Clinton is going to do get angry more than once by November.

]]> By: Leonard Witt http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-3976 Leonard Witt Sun, 03 Feb 2008 22:20:00 +0000 http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-3976 Hi Howard: I agree the stories should be more exciting, but that still presupposes a passive audience. I am looking for a way in which the excitement continues among the people who attended the rally; an online tribal dance, an exchange of ideas, photos, videos. How might that happen in an easy to participate, yet meaningful, way? Or should people just savor the moment and then move on? If so, then a more exciting story might be enough. Hi Howard:

I agree the stories should be more exciting, but that still presupposes a passive audience. I am looking for a way in which the excitement continues among the people who attended the rally; an online tribal dance, an exchange of ideas, photos, videos. How might that happen in an easy to participate, yet meaningful, way? Or should people just savor the moment and then move on? If so, then a more exciting story might be enough.

]]> By: Howard Owens http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-3973 Howard Owens Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:32:07 +0000 http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-3973 Maybe sports writers should cover political events. Think about it: Sports writers know one thing -- they are writing for an audience that not only knows the outcome of the game, but probably know as much about the game as they do. So game good game stories have to recapture the spirit of the event (to connect with readers through confirmation of their perceptions) and provide some color (such as good post-game quotes, which is information readers couldn't get for themselves). Of course, sportswriters like news (conflict), too, especially if it really is NEWs. But good sports writers have to be able to tell a story people already know. Maybe sports writers should cover political events.

Think about it: Sports writers know one thing — they are writing for an audience that not only knows the outcome of the game, but probably know as much about the game as they do. So game good game stories have to recapture the spirit of the event (to connect with readers through confirmation of their perceptions) and provide some color (such as good post-game quotes, which is information readers couldn’t get for themselves).

Of course, sportswriters like news (conflict), too, especially if it really is NEWs. But good sports writers have to be able to tell a story people already know.

]]> By: Remains of the Day, 2-2-08, Journalism/Media edition | Writes Like She Talks http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-3961 Remains of the Day, 2-2-08, Journalism/Media edition | Writes Like She Talks Sun, 03 Feb 2008 04:33:28 +0000 http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-3961 [...] 3. When Bill Clinton skips the outrageousness, he gets placed on page 3, and not page 1. [...] […] 3. When Bill Clinton skips the outrageousness, he gets placed on page 3, and not page 1. […]

]]> By: Bryan Murley http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-3956 Bryan Murley Sat, 02 Feb 2008 21:57:52 +0000 http://pjnet.org/post/1720/#comment-3956 Earlier this week, the Denver post ran an article about a Mitt Romney speech at a car dealership with approximately 1,000 people in attendance, while neglecting to run an article about the Barack Obama speech at the Denver University hockey arena that featured an overflow crowd of over 10,000. That's just wrong. Earlier this week, the Denver post ran an article about a Mitt Romney speech at a car dealership with approximately 1,000 people in attendance, while neglecting to run an article about the Barack Obama speech at the Denver University hockey arena that featured an overflow crowd of over 10,000. That’s just wrong.

]]>