The headline on a front page Montgomery Advertiser story this morning was so bland that I almost skipped it. I'm glad I didn't.
Those who made it past the headline would learn that GOP Candidate for Governor Bradley Bryne had accepted money from PACS that had received...or soon thereafter received... money from gambling interests.
Yes, Mr. Byrne does say there is a need for a ban on PAC to PAC transfers. Every candidate that I know of, and every legislator I have heard asked about it takes the same position, yet session after session bills to ban PAC to PAC transfers die.
But back to the headline. Perhaps it should have read something like
Byrne took PAC money that appeared tied to gambling"
or, maybe better:
Byrne says PAC money not from gambling"
My newspaper headline writing experience is truly minimal (though not nonexistent), and I am aware that there are only so many words you can use in so much space, dependant on the typeface and font size.
Advertiser Reporter Sebastian Kitchen does a thorough job of reporting a complex story. He'll be the first to tell you that reporters
don't write the headlines, but whoever wrote this one did a disservice to the story and, frankly, a favor to Mr. Byrne.
And perhaps part two of today's MMMM helps explain the headline?
A couple of weeks ago ABC News announced massive cuts..something like 20% of their newsgathering staff. A year ago it was CBS and some of their affiliate stations laying off staff. Newspapers, of course, have led the way for this lemming-like charge off the cliff.
The Advertiser and other Alabama newspapers have faced significant layoffs.
Can you see the impact on-air? NBC's Brian Williams during the Olympics...the wrong story graphic is behind him to his left. A moment later, he says The U.S. had won a certain number of medals...but the graphic giving the count offers another total.
On other programs, wrong tapes run. "Live shots" fail. Network broadcasts start to look like something you might see produced by a skeleton weekend staff in market #200.
But the most significant result won't be as easy to see as an incorrect graphic or a wrong video. It will be the slow reduction in the news being generated through the vetting process editors provide, especially in newspapers, since they originate much of the news. More stories will be "breaking" on Twitter and Facebook and places like this blog, and I don't say that as a positive.
What sources will be left for news consumers to trust?
(
UPDATE:The 2010 Pew Report on the State of The Media is out this morning.]
(The
Monday
Morning
Media
Memo is a regular feature of this blog.]