Anybody catch the mistake in this Torch story?
http://www.valpotorch.com/features/article_6a70795a-252a-11e2-bb0c-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valpotorch.com/features/article_6a70795a-252a-11e2-bb0c-001a4bcf6878.html)
Hint: It makes you ask the question "Why not?" but I think we all know the answer.
Makes you wonder how much she actually knows about the team... or probably simply this year's schedule. Could just be an honest mistake on a fact that hasn't quite sunk in...
On another note, what has everyone else thought about The Torch's sports coverage the past few years? I caught up with this week's stories and some made me question how "into it" the writers are at times. Having worked there as a former student, I know the in's and out's, and I know it can be difficult for some to follow the teams as actively as they like if they have classes, social lives, what have you. I won't name names of course, but I recognize that some of the writers have room to improve, but there are definitely others that are going to the games, getting all the interviews and information on their own, and doing well because they are stepping up their game.
One of the torch writers recently got in a bit of trouble for copying a bunch of stories from other places.
Quote from: HC on November 03, 2012, 11:46:00 AM
One of the torch writers recently got in a bit of trouble for copying a bunch of stories from other places.
Who, Stephen Glass? LOL. But seriously, how recently are we talking about? I know in '09 someone was copying stories, but they were "practice stories." The person in question was basically on a tryout to earn the way onto the actual paper, but that person got kicked out for plagiarism.
Did I miss something? The author's suggests that students BE SURE TO CHECK OUT A BUTLER GAME. He's a little late in that idea.
The students should try coming out to see other Horizon games in decent numbers. Last year's team was great. Of course if the Brauer Art Museum is a big draw,.......then I guess I may be swimming upstream with this idea.
Quote from: crusadermoe on November 03, 2012, 05:58:14 PM
Did I miss something? The author's suggests that students BE SURE TO CHECK OUT A BUTLER GAME. He's a little late in that idea.
The students should try coming out to see other Horizon games in decent numbers. Last year's team was great. Of course if the Brauer Art Museum is a big draw,.......then I guess I may be swimming upstream with this idea.
that's the whole point of the thread.
Quote from: KL31NY on November 03, 2012, 03:57:33 PM
Quote from: HC on November 03, 2012, 11:46:00 AM
One of the torch writers recently got in a bit of trouble for copying a bunch of stories from other places.
Who, Stephen Glass? LOL. But seriously, how recently are we talking about? I know in '09 someone was copying stories, but they were "practice stories." The person in question was basically on a tryout to earn the way onto the actual paper, but that person got kicked out for plagiarism.
http://www.valpotorch.com/opinion/staff_editorials/article_5743a400-14aa-11e2-9040-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valpotorch.com/opinion/staff_editorials/article_5743a400-14aa-11e2-9040-001a4bcf6878.html)
To be fair, the story was a features story, not a sports story, so odds are they didn't know about Butler leaving. That also means the person editing it isn't a sports guy, and unlike the past couple of years, neither of the top editors are big sports guys.
And about the whole plagiarism thing, I think the most disappointing thing is that the guy wasn't caught sooner.
Quote from: crusader1897 on November 04, 2012, 12:51:08 PMTo be fair, the story was a features story, not a sports story, so odds are they didn't know about Butler leaving. That also means the person editing it isn't a sports guy, and unlike the past couple of years, neither of the top editors are big sports guys. And about the whole plagiarism thing, I think the most disappointing thing is that the guy wasn't caught sooner.
I asked a very successful VU journalism alum (Class of 1988) about the story and here is his interesting take:
"It's sad to see what has happened to journalism since we were there. One of the reasons I chose Valpo was I envisioned a career writing for Newsweek and Jack Anderson advised me to attend a school with an old-school journalism degree program... VU had one, but it ended my freshman year in favor of a more general 'communications' program with PR and instruction in 'floppy disc' technology that Doug will remember.
The basic tenets of the profession have been in decline over the last 25 years and next month Newsweek will print its final issue. I've had the opportunity to write for some 50+ publications over the years and participate in the exciting advent of Internet communications, which came a long way since hacking around on Miller's Atari modem... but the industry has been brutalized and missed a huge opportunity to adopt and evolve with the new tools. That makes it very tough for this generation of students and it's too bad so many of them are going $50,000 into debt without getting the skills they need for the future."
Disheartening to read through everything. My final notes before I hopefully put this into the back of my memory for good...
The girl who wrote the feature with the VU vs. BU note is probably like a lot of people who are used to these "rivalry" games and just didn't think there wouldn't be a game this year, which she still should have checked.
While I have never officially edited for the Torch myself, I know they trust that the information is good within the stories. Usually, most of the changes refer to style and occasionally things like grammar.
I know the person in the recent plagiarism case personally. Certainly not a bad person, just made some bad choices. This person is a busy individual with a great passion for soccer, and I hope they learned a lot that will help in this person's other current affairs and in life as a whole.
In further conclusion, The Torch is a great place to get some experience, and it's a learn as a go effort. The more you care and put in, the more you get out. Some extra formal work and training from experienced pros, though, would be great for the future.
Quote from: Ralph on November 04, 2012, 02:09:28 PM
Quote from: crusader1897 on November 04, 2012, 12:51:08 PMTo be fair, the story was a features story, not a sports story, so odds are they didn't know about Butler leaving. That also means the person editing it isn't a sports guy, and unlike the past couple of years, neither of the top editors are big sports guys. And about the whole plagiarism thing, I think the most disappointing thing is that the guy wasn't caught sooner.
I asked a very successful VU journalism alum (Class of 1988) about the story and here is his interesting take:
"It's sad to see what has happened to journalism since we were there. One of the reasons I chose Valpo was I envisioned a career writing for Newsweek and Jack Anderson advised me to attend a school with an old-school journalism degree program... VU had one, but it ended my freshman year in favor of a more general 'communications' program with PR and instruction in 'floppy disc' technology that Doug will remember.
The basic tenets of the profession have been in decline over the last 25 years and next month Newsweek will print its final issue. I've had the opportunity to write for some 50+ publications over the years and participate in the exciting advent of Internet communications, which came a long way since hacking around on Miller's Atari modem... but the industry has been brutalized and missed a huge opportunity to adopt and evolve with the new tools. That makes it very tough for this generation of students and it's too bad so many of them are going $50,000 into debt without getting the skills they need for the future."
newsweek is ending their print issues? i hadn't heard that.
nerd, they will be done printing the paper copy, and going all digital on January 1, 2013. It was getting too expensive to print so many paper copies that go unsold of a weekly magazine that more people were reading online anyway.
Anyone in the journalism realm, do you guys see this sooner, but the 'old hat' didn't believe the internet would have the future we're living now?
Also, the number of sites where you can read news for free is slowly, but steadily, shrinking. Some are giving you x number of free page views a month, others are taking you right to the pay option.
Quote from: valporun on November 04, 2012, 10:57:50 PM
nerd, they will be done printing the paper copy, and going all digital on January 1, 2013. It was getting too expensive to print so many paper copies that go unsold of a weekly magazine that more people were reading online anyway.
Anyone in the journalism realm, do you guys see this sooner, but the 'old hat' didn't believe the internet would have the future we're living now?
In recent years Newsweek has adopted a far left political bend, which has alienated most moderates and nearly all conservatives. According to Gallup only 21% of Americans are self-described liberals. A smaller target market combined with the challenges that all print media face and Newsweek's business model no longer works - plain and simple.
By the way in case someone is hoping for a Newsweek web-based rebirth, financial analysts are all saying they are basically done. End of an era.
Quote from: wh on November 05, 2012, 06:48:57 PMQuote from: valporun on November 04, 2012, 10:57:50 PMnerd, they will be done printing the paper copy, and going all digital on January 1, 2013. It was getting too expensive to print so many paper copies that go unsold of a weekly magazine that more people were reading online anyway. Anyone in the journalism realm, do you guys see this sooner, but the 'old hat' didn't believe the internet would have the future we're living now?
In recent years Newsweek has adopted a far left political bend, which has alienated most moderates and nearly all conservatives. According to Gallup only 21% of Americans are self-described liberals. A smaller target market combined with the challenges that all print media face and Newsweek's business model no longer works - plain and simple. By the way in case someone is hoping for a Newsweek web-based rebirth, financial analysts are all saying they are basically done. End of an era.
Oh boy, another "Blame the Liberals!!!!" post.
I'm used to it. On the previous board, we had heated threads about politics for about 4 months leading up to the 2008 election.
I thought this board was now a place where political discussions were unnecessary. Don't we get enough in the media before an election. Why in the world do you want to talk politics on a sports message board in the General VU Discussion section?? Please leave it out.
So we can discuss failing journalism, but we can't discuss why it failed?
Right. Makes total sense. Like having a discussion about the Civil War but not being allowed to talk about economic issues.
http://www.snpp.com/episodes/3F20.html (http://www.snpp.com/episodes/3F20.html)
I had a subscription to Newsweek for my 11th birthday and kept it for 20 years. WH is dead-on, whether you like the truth or not...which, apparently you don't, since there was nothing political in the post; merely philosophical.
We'll get to the political tomorrow night.
Quote from: Ralph on November 05, 2012, 07:24:05 PM
Quote from: wh on November 05, 2012, 06:48:57 PMQuote from: valporun on November 04, 2012, 10:57:50 PMnerd, they will be done printing the paper copy, and going all digital on January 1, 2013. It was getting too expensive to print so many paper copies that go unsold of a weekly magazine that more people were reading online anyway. Anyone in the journalism realm, do you guys see this sooner, but the 'old hat' didn't believe the internet would have the future we're living now?
In recent years Newsweek has adopted a far left political bend, which has alienated most moderates and nearly all conservatives. According to Gallup only 21% of Americans are self-described liberals. A smaller target market combined with the challenges that all print media face and Newsweek's business model no longer works - plain and simple. By the way in case someone is hoping for a Newsweek web-based rebirth, financial analysts are all saying they are basically done. End of an era.
Oh boy, another "Blame the Liberals!!!!" post.
I am not making a political point, Ralph. I don't blame the readership, liberal or otherwise. My point was that there is much more to the Newsweek story than simply "they are a victim of the times." The economy and the Internet are major obstacles, but the best-of-the-best print organizations will adapt and overcome. Newsweek's executive leadership team did not.
"Nobody fails who ought not to fail. There is always a reason, in the man, for his good or bad fortune."
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Historyman - please stop playing high school hall monitor. Thank you.
Where in this liberal lean you speak of does the recent anti-Obama cover fall?
Quote from: StlVUFan on November 05, 2012, 10:38:08 PM
Where in this liberal lean you speak of does the recent anti-Obama cover fall?
Scoring points with the moderates or Libertarians, maybe?
Quote from: valporun on November 05, 2012, 10:59:52 PM
Quote from: StlVUFan on November 05, 2012, 10:38:08 PM
Where in this liberal lean you speak of does the recent anti-Obama cover fall?
Scoring points with the moderates or Libertarians, maybe?
I am familiar with the August cover and article. The Dems said it was full of errors about Obama's record and Republicans didn't trust it because of who printed it. At the end of the day, it was generally regarded as a desperate attempt by a failing organization to sell more magazines, which it did - for one month. In the grand scheme of things, I guess you could call it an anomaly.
Quote from: wh on November 05, 2012, 11:39:18 PM
Quote from: valporun on November 05, 2012, 10:59:52 PM
Quote from: StlVUFan on November 05, 2012, 10:38:08 PM
Where in this liberal lean you speak of does the recent anti-Obama cover fall?
Scoring points with the moderates or Libertarians, maybe?
I am familiar with the August cover and article. The Dems said it was full of errors about Obama's record and Republicans didn't trust it because of who printed it. At the end of the day, it was generally regarded as a desperate attempt by a failing organization to sell more magazines, which it did - for one month. In the grand scheme of things, I guess you could call it an anomaly.
I can go along with that, it certainly was jarring. I don't recall a cover like that before, excoriating a president of either stripe. What shocked me was a journalistic magazine blatantly siding against one side or the other.
On the other hand, since I did not partake of the column inside that was paired with the cover, I can't dismiss the possibility that it was anti-Obama, NOT by being pro-Romney, but by accusing Obama of not being liberal *enough*. There is always that element in politics, on both sides: the harsh critics within, criticizing timidity.
A couple of other notes:
1. As this is the General VU discussion forum, there is no need for toning down serious, intelligent, but pointed political opinion. The thing that people are fearing comes from only one person that I'm aware of in the history of this message board, and he was banned a long time ago for violating the TOS of this forum. Until I see another such example crop up, I'm completely comfortable with the post wh made.
2. This does not mean I don't question one element of the original post: only 21%??? I don't have facts to dispute that with, but that feels incredibly inaccurate to me. I would expect to find the opposite number (79%) before I would expect to see that number. If I had to guess, I'd guess closer to 55%. I know Gallup has a fine reputation, but I can't help questioning the methodology of that poll your talking about.
Quote from: StlVUFan on November 06, 2012, 11:29:32 PM
Quote from: wh on November 05, 2012, 11:39:18 PM
Quote from: valporun on November 05, 2012, 10:59:52 PM
Quote from: StlVUFan on November 05, 2012, 10:38:08 PM
Where in this liberal lean you speak of does the recent anti-Obama cover fall?
Scoring points with the moderates or Libertarians, maybe?
I am familiar with the August cover and article. The Dems said it was full of errors about Obama's record and Republicans didn't trust it because of who printed it. At the end of the day, it was generally regarded as a desperate attempt by a failing organization to sell more magazines, which it did - for one month. In the grand scheme of things, I guess you could call it an anomaly.
I can go along with that, it certainly was jarring. I don't recall a cover like that before, excoriating a president of either stripe. What shocked me was a journalistic magazine blatantly siding against one side or the other.
On the other hand, since I did not partake of the column inside that was paired with the cover, I can't dismiss the possibility that it was anti-Obama, NOT by being pro-Romney, but by accusing Obama of not being liberal *enough*. There is always that element in politics, on both sides: the harsh critics within, criticizing timidity.
A couple of other notes:
1. As this is the General VU discussion forum, there is no need for toning down serious, intelligent, but pointed political opinion. The thing that people are fearing comes from only one person that I'm aware of in the history of this message board, and he was banned a long time ago for violating the TOS of this forum. Until I see another such example crop up, I'm completely comfortable with the post wh made.
2. This does not mean I don't question one element of the original post: only 21%??? I don't have facts to dispute that with, but that feels incredibly inaccurate to me. I would expect to find the opposite number (79%) before I would expect to see that number. If I had to guess, I'd guess closer to 55%. I know Gallup has a fine reputation, but I can't help questioning the methodology of that poll your talking about.
Here's the article from Gallup that I was referring to:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-group.aspx (http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-group.aspx)
Didn't pick up on this right away, but this was limited to only those who are willing to identify themselves as one of the three categories.
My hunch is that is a small percentage of the actual people in the country, though again, I've no hard data to back it up.
For example, if they had asked me that question, I would have refused to specify. The usefulness of such labels is inversely proportional to the precision of their definition (i.e., the more vague the label is, the more useful it is, polemically). The guy who got booted from here a few years ago read exactly one short email from me and immediately put me into one of the categories. I have a severe allergy to being categorized and often get snarky with people when they try.
I also note that the line "liberal" is gradually trending upward. One might guess that some of the folks that are shedding the "moderate" category are replacing it with the "liberal" category.
Stl, he did the same with anyone who tried to question his reasoning for either his posts or his politics. It didn't matter who you were, if you didn't see his side of things and immediately stand with him, he labelled you and lumped you in with the rest of the "Liberals".
Quote from: valporun on November 08, 2012, 10:11:46 PMStl, he did the same with anyone who tried to question his reasoning for either his posts or his politics. It didn't matter who you were, if you didn't see his side of things and immediately stand with him, he labelled you and lumped you in with the rest of the "Liberals".
What is wrong with that?! Being called a Liberal is akin to being called a God.
Ralph, you had to really be apart of the board at that time to know what Stl and I mean with the banned poster. I don't feel being a liberal is wrong, but the way the poster attacked liberals was offensive to many, and it was really bad when it was 7 or 8 news threads with scathing conservative talk about how McCain was better than Obama or how some Republican was a better option that a "dummycrat", as he often referred to Dems. Anything else I'm missing here, Stl?
Quote from: wh on November 07, 2012, 07:25:11 AM1. As this is the General VU discussion forum, there is no need for toning down serious, intelligent, but pointed political opinion. The thing that people are fearing comes from only one person that I'm aware of in the history of this message board, and he was banned a long time ago for violating the TOS of this forum. Until I see another such example crop up, I'm completely comfortable with the post wh made.
Completely agree.
Read this caption from a photo in the past week's Torch. It's from a story about athletic achievements of VU student-athletes. http://www.valpotorch.com/news/article_9fe7d3f8-2ab6-11e2-a6ba-001a4bcf6878.html (http://www.valpotorch.com/news/article_9fe7d3f8-2ab6-11e2-a6ba-001a4bcf6878.html)
QuoteValparaiso University student athletes show success not only on the athletic field, but also academically. This year, VU will have a 100 percent student athletic graduation rate.