The Ten Month Beat

An account of the ten months at the graduate school of journalism for the class of 2006.

9.29.2005

A Place Called Home

She's a vain old lady of the Upper West Side. Cloistered amongst old money and Ivy, with her new money and ideas, she's always been the black sheep. She's 93 years old, a little eccentric, and mostly made of stone.

Rooted on the south-east corner of 116th and Broadway, the eight-story Graduate School of Journalism, with pillars and marble and faux-gas lamps, seems to fit well with the lush, modern-Greek Columbia University campus.

But the J-School had a difficult birth, conceived as she was by a Hungarian-born media mogul whose favorite color was yellow. Joseph Pulitzer, owner of The New York World, dreamed of making journalism respectable. Nearing the end of his years, in 1892 he offered the University $2 million to establish the school - and was turned down flat.

"She's a tradeswoman, not a professional," they cried.

Finally, 14 years later after had mogul passed away, his money was grudgingly taken and this baby girl was born. Pulitzer had high hopes for his progeny, a plaque in the lobby reads of "public virtue" and "trained intelligence."

But her academic peers have always looked down on her. The school's entrance opens not to the grand central commons, but to a scrap of grass outside the undergraduate dining hall. Tucked away, an embarrassment.

She is even the butt of jokes amongst journalist, whom she was designed to teach. Far from being based on high ideals, the Boston Globe's Renee Loth said that "The guiding ideological principles of most American newsrooms are entropy, chaos, procrastination and lunch."

And, if Michael Lewis's New Republic story "J-School Ate My Brain", has any grounding in truth she is not only a black ewe, but also a black widow. Lewis wrote in 1993 of bizarre classes, including demands that a hat generate a hundred story ideas.

But things are different now. Today there is no hat, because now they use a boot.

Still, despite the sneers, despite the jibes, this airy old lady still enjoys good company. Her suitors, mostly one-year flings, still arrive in droves. Their company and their gifts, coupled with her vanity, means she's always going under the knife. Construction work is ever-present to keep up with the latest trends: radio, television, and the newfangled internet.

Yet all this architectural botox can't disguise her age. Her elevators, only one of which goes all the way up, are mirror opposites (including, infuriatingly, the placement of floor buttons). To the left: stainless steel and smart. The right: particle board and vivid graffiti smut.

The history, the ill-fit, the attempt to marry ideals and practice is best seen in the lobby. Thomas Jefferson acts as bouncer, bronzed and imperious on a five-foot pedestal planted outside the front. Inside, there's that idealistic plaque, watched over old, dignified men. Carved high into the walls are medallions showing Addison, Franklin, Delane, Greeley, Thomas and Defoe.

The centerpiece is two grand wooden semi-circles on which this lady's mission is written bold. On one, "To uphold standards of excellence in journalism;" The other, "To educate the next generation of journalists."

But amidst this history, and these lofty ideals, she is trying hard to be modern. Attached to the rear of these wooden quarter-circles are six computer screens. The monitors are blank. Their cables hang lifeless, without a socket. Disconnected.

To be fair and balanced, these are the professor's marking comments: "Let's say a frown over this disorganized, careless, data-weak piece. Your viewpoint isn't based on a floor-by-floor evaluation of the structures or an intelligent curriculum critique of the ciriculum. Giving the school sexual identity doesn't help. Facts, figures and accurate reporting, let alone the good writing ability your first piece displayed, would help."

9.27.2005

Suddenly, law class has relevance

Apparently Judge John Roberts is not a fan of the Supreme Court's ruling in The New York Times v. Sullivan. His response to a question on the case from the Senate Judiciary Committee doesn't look too promising to journalists:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/27/politics/politicsspecial1/27libel.html

9.25.2005

good night, and good luck

opening the new york film festival was george clooney's movie about edward r. murrow, "good night, and good luck." i eagerly anticipated seeing the movie for a good year and was thrilled to walk up to the box office at 6pm and get two tickets for $10 each (obstructed view).

had i been able to hear the movie, i could tell you how much i liked it. alas, my theory that new yorkers don't know how to watch movies was proved many times over at that screening. why would the pretentiously-named "new york film society," a group that supposedly nurtures and loves films, choose to screen this award-winning movie at the avery fischer hall? all hard surfaces and the wrong dimensions for showing a film to a large audience (longer than it is wide), probably two rows of people could both see and hear the movie. also, why were so many people in black tie for a movie?

the title could have done well with a subtitle: good night, and good luck trying to watch this movie because this is new york and we only know how to watch the living theater and certainly can't lower ourselves to moronic things like movies and television.