Columbia Graduate School of Journalism (CJS) recently asked for my money. Here's the lede of the appeal:
FIFTY YEARS AGO, my classmates and I would have shared one of the proudest moments of our lives -- graduating from Columbia Journalism School. Instead, we'd gone on strike . . .
. . . over the U.S. bombing of Cambodia and the shooting of students by the National Guard at Kent State, so the campus was in chaos. Few attended graduation.
The writer is Margie Lehrman, CJS class of 1970. After journalism school, she had a successful career at NBC News.
Her email bemoans the coronavirus-inspired cancellation of alumni weekend at CJS and asks for a gift of $100 to the school's annual fund.
The key word in Ms. Lehrman's lede is "we." It refers collectively to "my classmates and I," meaning "my classmates and I had gone on strike."
The casual "we" suggests a degree of universality and rightness in the decision to walk a picket line. Her equally casual use of "so" suggests that a campus in chaos was the natural consequence of disturbing world events.
It's fair, I think, to read her lede as a celebration of the strike as the proper destination for right-thinking j-school graduates.
Did any graduates of the class of 1970 celebrate their journalism degrees the old-fashioned way? Not many. "Few attended graduation," Ms. Lehrman says. Am I wrong to detect a whiff of disappointment?
Back then, I probably would have agreed with Ms. Lehrman and the majority (it seems) of the class of '70. Now I know better.
Here's the lede that might have inspired me to reach for my checkbook:
FIFTY YEARS AGO, my classmates and I would have shared one of the proudest moments of our lives -- graduating from Columbia Journalism School. Instead, we missed the ceremony to file news reports on demonstrations by campus activists over the U.S. bombing of Cambodia and the shooting of students by the National Guard at Kent State. Few attended graduation.
Here's the thing: News reporters cover news; activists make news. Ms. Lehrman's email celebrates activists, not news reporters.
Columbia Graduate School of Journalism was then and is now (I suspect) largely a training ground for something grander than reporting the news fully, accurately, and fairly.
Why limit oneself to who, what, where, when, and why? Modern journalists know what's what -- the meaning of it all -- and feel compelled to share.
How do they know? Because most are left/progressive ideologues. And all ideologues, of whatever species, know what's what. What they don't know is that they are ideologues. Fish don't know they're wet; modern reporters don't know they're biased.
I'm not questioning any journalist or j-student's right to demonstrate for any cause he or she wishes, to support politicians with congenial viewpoints, or to write for publications with left/progressive agendas.
I just can't support journalism schools, newspapers, or other news media that mistake activism for honest journalism.
Modern journalism is a smoking ruin. To take one of many possible examples, the Trump-Russia collusion story was a politically inspired hoax. Modern journalism pushed the false narrative until it broke, then gave itself awards for getting things wrong.
Where are the mea culpas? Where are the stories exploring how the press was used by one political party to spy on and to destroy or weaken a presidency from the other party? Where are the stories unmasking government sources who fed false information to reporters?
Columbia Graduate School of Journalism shares the blame. With honorable exceptions, it largely produces activists, not reporters.
* * *
Unca D graduated from CSJ in the class of 1971. He also skipped graduation. He had a job as a reporter for The Houston Post and wanted to get to work.
Unca D's truly excellent photographs of Columbia Graduate School of Journalism:
"A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press . . . ."
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.