Under the category of "WELL DUH!," Editor & Publisher had an amusing little blurb on August 1st about a Harris poll "measuring public perceptions of 23 professions and occupations." It's hard to imagine that anyone would need to go to all that work to create the poll, however, at least as far as answering the question of where the occupation of journalism would rank with the American people. All they had to do was to take a peek at Newsbusters to get that easy answer: at the BOTTOM of the pile!
The lowly journalist ranks right down there with union leader, actor, and entertainer in the last ten least prestigious occupations. Still Don't Get No Respect: Poll Finds Journos At Bottom Of 'Prestige' Jobs
CHICAGO Hang down your head, journalist -- your fellow Americans don't think your career is much to be proud of.
The annual Harris Poll measuring public perceptions of 23 professions and occupations came out Wednesday -- and you can find journalists in the Bottom Ten.
Just 13% of the 1,100 U.S. adults surveyed in June and July said the occupation of journalist had "very great prestige," while 16% said it had "hardly any prestige at all." The plurality of respondents, 47%, grudging conceded there was "some prestige" in being a journalist.
Yeah. For SURE we coulda' told 'em that!
Well, maybe we would have had them in dead last place, right down there with politician and lawyer!
Anyway, there is your laughter for the day.
Update (Ken Shepherd, managing editor | 16:43): Speaking of laughter, Greg Gutfeld of Fox News's "Red Eye" (2 a.m. Eastern), is devoting tonight's "Gregalogue" to "Why We Hate Journalists"
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
}}}----> The Prestige
August 2, 2007 - 06:08 ET by Cool ArrowThere's the story. The term "Prestige" is now associated with Journalists. Not favorable or unfavorable, but ~~~Prestige~~~.
This means, of course that only 13% of Americans recognize the ~~~Prestige~~~ Journalists are due.
87% of the people, of course are illiterate.
And they still wonder
August 2, 2007 - 05:55 ET by rightsideAnd they still wonder why...
Yes! Have some.
Suggestion for journalists, which will be ignored
August 2, 2007 - 06:55 ET by sarcasmo(This one's an old sore spot with me...)
When you write a story -- especially a story on a technical subject -- consider showing a rough draft to people with a clue, who have perhaps worked for a decade or more with that thing you just discovered, and asking for his/her comments. This would be in order to make your story more accurate & complete.
Please note that these technically-clueful people can not take control of your computer via their reading of this rough draft. They also can not modify it. They also can't insert it into your editor's/publisher's mailbox under your name. ANY changes would of course be up to you, all they can do is comment, but the comments might be useful -- if, that is, you wish to tell an accurate, unbiased, and complete story -- and frankly, these days, that's questionable IMO. My idea relinquishes 0 journalistic control of any story.
You just don't get to spring inaccurate BS filled stories on victims who know way-more about the subject than you do, because if you keep trying that BS your approval levels will stay in the upper teens. Got it? Thanks.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
}}}----> Journalists
August 2, 2007 - 07:14 ET by Cool ArrowAnd resist every temptation to choose an out of work celebrity figurehead to champion your cause.
What am I saying? Your cause? No Mr. journalist it's not your cause, it's your report. Why would you need some jelly roll eating ex VP to blow soundbites up your posterior.
Reporters -vs- Journalists
August 2, 2007 - 07:52 ET by HelenSA woman called Rush yesterday and made a really good comment about this. She said that her father had worked for the Wall Street Journal for 60 years and that he had absolutely no time (or respect) for journalists. But he loved reporters.
Reporters report. ("Just the facts, ma'am"). Journalists editorialize and insert emotion, personal bias, preachiness, etc.
Wouldn't it be grand if "Reporters" weren't so dangerously close to extinction?
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" - Shakespeare
}}}----> Reporters
August 2, 2007 - 07:57 ET by Cool ArrowOnly journalist I follow closely at WSJ is Peggy Noonan. But I call her a columnist.
Seems most reporters know their step into the limelight lies in a catchy twist of truth.
Politicans and Journalists
August 2, 2007 - 08:02 ET by FaulknerFanThere's a good reason journalists rate on the same level with politicans. Many of the talking heads on the network news programs and some in the background are fomer politicans or political hacks - all Democrats!
}}}----> Well, almost
August 2, 2007 - 08:06 ET by Cool ArrowJohn Kasich was a Republican.
Kasich
August 2, 2007 - 08:14 ET by sarcasmoAnd for the record, the "was" part of his political career happened because Kasich got drunk with DC beltway power & broke explicit promises he'd made to honest Ohio gun owners. The gun owners fought back, even employing a few "dirty tricks" from what I've been told, but never any violence. When he lost, the RINO went-off to the news media, which is IMO where they all belong.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
I have repeatedly exchanged
August 2, 2007 - 13:48 ET by buddycI have repeatedly exchanged emails with high ups at E&P over their failure to follow the Ethical Standards adopted by their journalist associations and the failure o journalism schools to teach ethics. Once journalism returns to proper ethical standards this horrible perception of journalism will change.