Thanks for the background on the
president's advisory council. I am in agreement with you Dwight, why some issues over others. Add to your list of issues--one that I believe is clearly more relevant to
AEJMC--the forced retirement of Helen Thomas. We can also add to that list Arizona's senate bill 1070, which the governor has just signed into law. It prohibits teaching ethnic studies courses in schools that receive state funds. I also agree with you Jan that maybe we should "re-evaluate the system for having the president and
her/his advisors make statements attributable to the entire organization."
Anita Fleming-Rife BE WHO YOU ARE BECAUSE THOSE WHO MIND DON'T MATTER AND THOSE WHO MATTER DON'T MIND.
--- On Tue, 6/8/10, Dates, Jannette L.
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Dates, Jannette L. <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: AEJMC: Obama's Promised "Change" Lacks Transparency
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 8:20 AM
Dear
Dwight:
Thank
you. I feel as you do. You have very eloquently and succinctly written
and spoken about this issue—and I am in complete support of your response.
Why choose some “issues” over others, you ask? Clearly, the
issues you listed are as important to journalism and journalism educators as
the one raised by AEJMC’s leadership regarding President Obama’s
press conferences. We may need to re-evaluate the system for having the
president and her/his advisors make statements attributable to the entire
organization. I am embarrassed to have my name associated with this. These
statements about President Obama do not reflect my views at all.
Jannette L. Dates
Dean
John H. Johnson School of
Communications
Howard University
525 Bryant St., N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20059
202-806-7694 or 6113
From: FOR THE MINORITIES
AND COMMUNICATION DIV. OF AEJMC [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dwight
E. Brooks
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 7:53 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: AEJMC: Obama's Promised "Change" Lacks
Transparency
Anita & Colleagues,
This is the result of the President's Advisory Council that was formed last
year. This is something Carole Pardun wanted to do and spoke on during the
business meeting last August in Baltimore. While the statement does not
necessarily offend me, I find the choice of topic for the release dubious at
best. I can think of lots of equally or more demanding issues on which AEJMC could
have taken a position: I may be mistaken but this is the first stance for
the committee. If it is the first, it has failed miserably in my opinion. If
not, I'd like to see any previous statementsBut why not:
1. Fox news as abandoning the practice of journalism in favor of right-wing
advocacy?
2. A statement on the hypocrisy of the tea parties?
3. The Arizona immigration law
4. The ongoing lying and hypocrisy of the Republican members of Congress (and
some Democrats too)?
5. Heck, there is a proposed bill in Michigan that would bar journalists from
covering certain politics events without taking some sort of test or obtaining
a "license"--a true slap at First Amendment rights of journalists.
(I've just brought this to the attention of the PF&R Committee)?
6. Did I mention the Arizona immigration law?
7. Sarah Palin--when has she held a press conference?
8. That Rand Paul guy in Kentucky and his position on civil rights?
9. BP (and its response) and the oil spill in the gulf? Or was this penned two
months ago?
My last question is, what do we say/do in response to this? Can
committees within AEJMC respond to its own leadership or issue its own position
statements? I don't know who is on this so-called presidential advisory
committee, but there statement does not represent my concern or perspective and
I am approaching outrage when I think about all of the more central issues that
were ignored over this false outrage over Presicent Obama's lack of pressers.
Dwight
Dwight E. Brooks, Ph.D. Professor and Director School of Journalism College of Mass Communication Middle Tennessee State University Murfreesboro, TN 37132 Tel: 615 494-8925 e-mail: [log in to unmask]
|