The Dagley Dagley Daily  

By Janet Dagley Dagley
Covering the world from the waterfront in Hoboken, New Jersey, USA

ISSN 1544-9114

Add this blog to your My Yahoo! page:

Add to My Yahoo!

Or click here to read our Atom feed:

Support The Dagley Dagley Daily:
Click to contribute

Your choice

Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

Check out our Dagley Dagley Daily souvenir merchandise!

Support This Site

The Dagley Dagley Daily
is brought to you by:


Bohemian Hillbillies

Buy our CD
Once Removed
at CDBaby

The Dagley Dagley Daily

01/26/2003 - 02/02/2003 02/16/2003 - 02/23/2003 02/23/2003 - 03/02/2003 03/02/2003 - 03/09/2003 03/09/2003 - 03/16/2003 03/16/2003 - 03/23/2003 03/23/2003 - 03/30/2003 03/30/2003 - 04/06/2003 04/06/2003 - 04/13/2003 04/13/2003 - 04/20/2003 04/20/2003 - 04/27/2003 04/27/2003 - 05/04/2003 05/04/2003 - 05/11/2003 05/11/2003 - 05/18/2003 05/18/2003 - 05/25/2003 05/25/2003 - 06/01/2003 06/01/2003 - 06/08/2003 06/08/2003 - 06/15/2003 06/15/2003 - 06/22/2003 06/22/2003 - 06/29/2003 06/29/2003 - 07/06/2003 07/06/2003 - 07/13/2003 07/13/2003 - 07/20/2003 07/20/2003 - 07/27/2003 07/27/2003 - 08/03/2003 08/03/2003 - 08/10/2003 08/17/2003 - 08/24/2003 08/24/2003 - 08/31/2003 08/31/2003 - 09/07/2003 09/07/2003 - 09/14/2003 09/14/2003 - 09/21/2003 09/21/2003 - 09/28/2003 09/28/2003 - 10/05/2003 10/05/2003 - 10/12/2003 10/12/2003 - 10/19/2003 10/19/2003 - 10/26/2003 10/26/2003 - 11/02/2003 11/02/2003 - 11/09/2003 11/09/2003 - 11/16/2003 11/16/2003 - 11/23/2003 11/23/2003 - 11/30/2003 11/30/2003 - 12/07/2003 12/07/2003 - 12/14/2003 12/14/2003 - 12/21/2003 12/21/2003 - 12/28/2003 12/28/2003 - 01/04/2004 01/04/2004 - 01/11/2004 01/11/2004 - 01/18/2004 01/18/2004 - 01/25/2004 01/25/2004 - 02/01/2004 02/01/2004 - 02/08/2004 02/08/2004 - 02/15/2004 02/15/2004 - 02/22/2004 02/22/2004 - 02/29/2004 02/29/2004 - 03/07/2004 03/07/2004 - 03/14/2004 03/14/2004 - 03/21/2004 03/21/2004 - 03/28/2004 03/28/2004 - 04/04/2004 04/04/2004 - 04/11/2004 04/11/2004 - 04/18/2004 04/18/2004 - 04/25/2004 04/25/2004 - 05/02/2004 05/02/2004 - 05/09/2004 05/09/2004 - 05/16/2004 05/16/2004 - 05/23/2004 05/23/2004 - 05/30/2004 05/30/2004 - 06/06/2004 06/06/2004 - 06/13/2004 06/13/2004 - 06/20/2004 06/20/2004 - 06/27/2004 07/04/2004 - 07/11/2004 07/11/2004 - 07/18/2004 07/18/2004 - 07/25/2004 07/25/2004 - 08/01/2004 08/01/2004 - 08/08/2004 08/08/2004 - 08/15/2004 08/15/2004 - 08/22/2004 08/22/2004 - 08/29/2004 08/29/2004 - 09/05/2004 09/05/2004 - 09/12/2004 09/12/2004 - 09/19/2004 09/19/2004 - 09/26/2004 09/26/2004 - 10/03/2004 10/03/2004 - 10/10/2004 10/10/2004 - 10/17/2004 10/17/2004 - 10/24/2004 10/24/2004 - 10/31/2004 10/31/2004 - 11/07/2004 11/07/2004 - 11/14/2004 11/14/2004 - 11/21/2004 11/21/2004 - 11/28/2004 11/28/2004 - 12/05/2004 12/05/2004 - 12/12/2004 12/12/2004 - 12/19/2004 12/19/2004 - 12/26/2004 12/26/2004 - 01/02/2005 01/02/2005 - 01/09/2005 01/09/2005 - 01/16/2005 01/16/2005 - 01/23/2005 01/23/2005 - 01/30/2005 01/30/2005 - 02/06/2005 02/06/2005 - 02/13/2005 02/13/2005 - 02/20/2005 02/20/2005 - 02/27/2005 03/20/2005 - 03/27/2005 07/02/2006 - 07/09/2006

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Who Links Here

My blogroll:

My Technorati Profile



Though India wasn't prime viewing territory for this morning's annular eclipse of the sun, the event probably got more attention there than anywhere else in the world. That's because of the Hindu myth that anyone who takes a dip in the Sannehit and Brahm Sarovars (water tanks) at Kurukshetra in northern India during a solar eclipse will attain salvation. Apparently there's no fine print in the myth limiting the salvation to total eclipses. The BBC has posted a collection of amateur eclipse photos, and though clouds obscured the view for science correspondent Pallab Ghosh, correspondent Sue Nelson managed to see it and file a video report.

  posted by Janet Dagley Dagley @10:38 AM



Sun, Moon to honor the late June Carter Cash with ring-of-fire eclipse

Though neither heavenly body has issued a statement, NASA reports that tomorrow there will be an annular solar eclipse, visible (weather permitting) in Europe, Asia, and parts of Alaska and Canada. If you are in one of those places and you attempt to watch the eclipse, or even take a glance, please be sure to take the necessary precautions to avoid damaging your eyes, and never look directly at the sun (Galileo went partially blind that way). If you prepare a pinhole viewer for the occasion, you might want to save it for the total solar eclipse on November 23.

In other news, the spelling bee is over, and the winner is Sai Gunturi of Dallas, Texas. The Hindustan Times picked up the local angle because Sai is an Indian-American. The winning word: pococurante.

  posted by Janet Dagley Dagley @2:18 PM



Word games

What a time for the audio to go out: one of the most intense competitions in the English language is going on right now on ESPN, the final round of the 76th annual National Spelling Bee, but ESPN has gone silent. Fortunately I was able to catch the morning round, with sound, to discover how far the sport of competitive spelling has come since I gave it up 40 years ago. Today's spellers have not only style, but play-by-play and color commentary by former competitive spellers. Some of them spell so fast the judges must listen to an audio replay to determine if the contestant got it right, while others pause dramatically after each letter. All of them use what strategy they can during play, asking for definitions, word origins, or for the word in the context of a sentence, pronouncing the word over and over before risking everything by spelling it out. Spelling may never draw the kind of crowd or excitement that more physical sports attract, but at least it now has a major motion picture: Spellbound, a documentary about the National Spelling Bee, just opened in theaters.

They say you never forget the word you missed, and I do remember the one that ultimately tripped me (ebullition -- the act/process/state of boiling or bubbling up; sudden and violent outburst/display) as well as the one that knocked me out of competition for a few rounds: you know that 60s band fronted by John Fogerty, best known for its hit "Rolling on the River"? Nobody had heard of Credence (or was it Creedence?) Clearwater Revival back then, nor did anybody encounter the word "credence/creedence" except in spelling competitions. A Google search on "Creedence Clearwater Revival" turns up 58,800 results, while a search for "Credence Clearwater Revival" returns only 6,140. I'm not sure which way I spelled the word in competition, but my choice was ruled wrong by the judges and I was eliminated. As I sat there in the audience watching the rest of the competition, however, I had no idea that my mother had left the auditorium and gone to find a dictionary. The dictionary considered both versions of "credence/creedence" correct, though one (I forget which) was preferred, and when Mom pointed that out to the judges, I was reinstated, which was advantageous to me because I got the word "advantageous" right, thus moving on to the next round.

If you'd like to get into competitive spelling yourself, you should start young, as no one over the age of 16 may compete in the National Bee. One of today's finalists is a third-grader, while the others are 8th-graders. You'll have to memorize a lot of words, but to make things easier, you can ignore the following winning words from spelling bees past, since they probably won't be used again anytime soon:


  posted by Janet Dagley Dagley @2:49 PM



"‘Did you just f***ing shoot the Palestinian [sic] Hotel?'"

Yesterday the Committee to Protect Journalists released its report on the April 8 U.S. attack on the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad, where more than 100 journalists were covering the war. Two journalists, Spanish cameraman Jose Couso, of Telecinco, and Taras Portsyuk, a Ukrainian cameraman for Reuters, were killed. Though the Pentagon has said the U.S. tank that fired on the hotel was "returning fire," there is no sound of any shooting in audio and video recordings of the period immediately before the shelling. The CPJ report concludes that the killings were not deliberate, but avoidable, and found that "There is simply no evidence to support the official U.S. position that U.S. forces were returning hostile fire from the Palestine Hotel. It conflicts with the eyewitness testimony of numerous journalists in the hotel." So far, 14 journalists have died covering the Iraq war, 9 of them in combat situations, including the attack on the Palestine Hotel. The quote in the headline above is from Lt. Col. Philip DeCamp, as quoted by Chris Tomlinson, an Associated Press reporter embedded with an infantry company that had just arrived in Baghdad.

  posted by Janet Dagley Dagley @3:14 PM



Meanwhile, on the other top of the world...

Much of the world's attention, and adventurers, may be on Mt. Everest this week, but meanwhile on the other top of the world, the North Pole, British explorer Pen Hadow has been having a very, very rough week. He skied, swam, and walked his way into the history books May 19, becoming the first solo trekker ever to make it to the geographic North Pole via Canada. Then triumph turned to near-tragedy as weather prevented a rescue plane from picking him up as scheduled, leaving him stuck on an ice floe for four days as his mobile phone died and food rations began running out, leaving him to get by on nothing but nuts and chocolate. Fortunately, the weather cleared and Hadow was rescued early this afternoon, "tired, hungry, and in need of a shower," according to the official statement from his support team.

  posted by Janet Dagley Dagley @2:31 PM



Virtual view from the top

Want to see the view from Mt. Everest, without all the bother and risk of climbing there yourself? Visit the blogosphere's third-most-linked-to site today: a 360-degree view from atop Mt. Everest, photographed in 1989 by Roderick Mackenzie. Everest is in the headlines a lot these days what with the 50th anniversary of the mountain's conquest by much-credited Sir Edmund Hillary and hardly-ever-credited Tenzing Norgay Sherpa on May 29, 1953. Since then, an estimated 1,300 people have climbed the 29,035-foot Everest, and another sherpa, known as Appa, celebrated the anniversary by making his 13th trip to the top. While it takes most climbers an average of four days to reach the top, the sherpas who guide climbers amuse themselves with speed-climbing competitions. The latest record is just under 11 hours, up and back from the base camp at 17,380 feet above sea level.

  posted by Janet Dagley Dagley @11:37 AM



And if you err now, we'll throw in a free 2-week vacation...

You've probably figured out by now that I am not jockeying for a position at The New York Times. But I must admit that the newspaper's innovative new discipline program for errant reporters is tempting me to lower my standards and reconsider: reporter Rick Bragg, who, unlike me, actually won the Pulitzer Prize, is now being punished with a two-week paid suspension after it was discovered that an intern who contributed to one of his articles last year was not credited. No word on what prize, if any, the intern has been awarded as compensation. Though I wouldn't object to being paid for two weeks of not working, I don't think I'd qualify because I'd have to make an exception to my policy of attributing and crediting my sources. Now if they'd throw in airline tickets to a warm, beachfront place, and a nice hotel to go along with it....

The more traditional newspaper penal system, however, focuses not on paid leave but memos. For decades, at least, most newspaper transgressions have been punishable by memo: sometimes memos that the errant reporter or editor is required to write, or even more often, memos that the entire staff is required to read. And despite the Times's new punishment plan for some, it appears that memo discipline continues to thrive there. Media watchdog Jim Romenesko of the Poynter Institute is collecting those memos so that we all can participate vicariously in the Times staff's punishment.

Even though the memos weren't sent to me, per se, I'm taking the liberty of answering some of the questions in them, in hopes that I, too, might win one of those two-week paid vacations myself.

In a May 22 memo published by Romenesko, Allan M. Siegal, who heads "The Siegal Committee," formed to "conduct a comprehensive review..." in the wake of the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal, asks:

How widely has responsibility been shared until now? How widely has information been shared among newsroom managers about prospective hires? What is our screening and interviewing process? How widely has information been shared among managers about rejections, and the reasons? How should these things change?>>

I don't know about how you share responsibility or information, but I do have a couple of suggestions about your screening process for new hires.

a) Instead of choosing somebodies-who-know-somebodies, or the best young graduates of the best schools, consider reporters whose mommies and daddies might not have had the wherewithal to send their children to those schools, whose mommies and daddies might not even know anyone at the Times, and who might not even know anyone there themselves. Consider those not only of different skin tones, but of diverse backgrounds, backgrounds that may not include even a single college class. Consider applicants of all ages as well. Open your doors to actual diversity, not just a color-coordinated palette of the affluent well-connected all trained to think and act alike.

b) Drop the physical examination required for employment. It obviously missed whatever problems Mr. Blair had, so why continue wasting the money you're spending invading potential employees' privacy like that? If physical prowess or specific abilities are necessary for the job, then please continue those exams, but if not, let the physical go the way of the old Knight-Ridder Newspapers' job application question, "Do you climb stairs two steps at a time?" Focus your scrutiny and resources instead on all the other aspects of the applicant's fitness for the job.

Next question, please:

How widely do we communicate present and foreseeable needs? How do we communicate the availability of assignments? Do those (supervisors and managers) with knowledge get a chance to advise on a potential assignment?

How do we track the aspirations of current staff members? How do we counsel them on realistic expectations and on what they can do to qualify? Is this effort interdepartmental? Who in the newsroom can authoritatively speak for management about the realism of an ambition?

Is the system transparent? Does Staffer A know that Staffer B is preparing for a foreign assignment? Does Staffer A understand why Staffer B was chosen?

What's our procedure for making spontaneous temporary assignments out of town or abroad? Does that process systematically consider staff members' ambitions? When time permits, are our needs made widely known? Could they be? Are the lending and borrowing desks systematically informed of the staffer's performance record? When the assignment is complete, do we write an evaluation?>>

Without answering all those questions specifically (I don't know about yours, but my readers do have other things to do today), I can tell you that every news organization I've ever worked for has had a Golden-Boy system, and from what I've heard, yours does, too. The Golden Boys are usually marked from the moment they arrive for priority handling throughout their careers, either because somebody who knows somebody recommended them, or more often because they are themselves somebodies who know somebody. You can easily spot the Golden Boys: they're the ones who go to lunch with the editors and/or publishers. While it is possible for a newsroom nobody to become a Golden Boy, not by going to lunch but usually by happening onto a story much bigger than any that would normally be assigned to a non-Golden non-Boy, that sort of alchemy doesn't happen often. One easy way to increase the non-Golden staffers' chances would be to require editors to choose their lunch companions at random from a pool that includes the whole staff, not just the usual suspects.

How do we recruit and hire for them? How do we promote out of them? Is the process more or less rigorous than for regular hiring? How do we decide on terminations during the program? Is the process transparent to our staff? Are the results transparent to our staff? Is the scorecard known to the staff?

Just what is the connection - and/or the separation - between intermediate programs and diversity programs? Are the standards for admission, graduation and termination the same for all races/ethnicities/genders, and does our staff understand that? How can we safeguard both diversity and fairness as these programs go forward?

How can we keep our staff aware that "intermediate" does not equate with minority or diversity and vice versa?...>>

I won't pretend to know how your internal machinery works, nor will I attempt to reconstruct it the way Times media writer Jacques Steinberg reconstructed the big staff meeting he wasn't allowed to attend. (What, no two-week paid vacation for that?) And I admit I have no idea what you mean here by "intermediate." But if you're using that word as a euphemism for "fair-to-middling" on the assumption that the only way to achieve diversity is to admit and even advance the more mediocre members of any minority group, then you need to go back to the dictionary, look up the word "diversity," and write us another memo on that specific topic. By 5 p.m. Tuesday, please.

How do we routinely prevent errors? How do we respond to them when we learn about them? Are our desks uniform in their policies and procedures?

Is accuracy considered adequately in our personnel actions - performance evaluations, raises, discipline? Are we uniform among departments? Does the staff understand our standard?

Is our threshold for printing corrections too high or too low? With small errors inevitable, are we sending a bad message when we let corrections accumulate even on the records of high-performing staff members? What alternatives are there? What are others' best practices?>>

OK, first you find the guy who said this on national television a few weeks ago:

"This system is not set up to catch someone who sets out to lie and to use every means at his or her disposal to put false information into the paper."

His name is Howell Raines, and he needs more than a two-week vacation. He needs to spend at least two weeks doing nothing but opening the mountains of press releases, media kits and 8-by-10 glossies that come into your news organization every day, and then he needs to spend another two weeks going to press conferences, and two weeks after that listening to and reading nothing but statements from politicians, and then he needs to spend two more weeks writing a memo explaining what he's learned about how much of the business and political world's resources are devoted to putting false or misleading information into the paper. After that, another two weeks for the memo detailing a new system for catching "someone who sets out to lie and to use every means at his or her disposal to put false information into the paper."

Now to your specific questions: No answer to the first three, no to the fourth ("is accuracy considered adequately in our personnel actions...?"), and a big "NO" to the fifth, "Are we uniform among departments?" and sixth "Does the staff understand our standard"" -- that is unless everyone is entitled to the aforementioned two-week paid vacation punishment.

I can't say whether your threshold for printing corrections is too high or too low -- sometimes you print the ones I send in, sometimes you ignore them, and that seems to have little to do with whether you actually erred or not, like the time when you credited Knicks basketball great Earl "The Pearl" Monroe with the 5-string accomplishments of banjo-picking pioneer Earl Scruggs. Are you sending a bad message by letting corrections accumulate even on the records of high-performing staff members? If they've got a bunch of corrections accumulated, then just how high-performing are they? What alternatives are there? I'd suggest redefining "high-performing." What are others' best practices? Most organizations traditionally punish by memo.

How open are we to tips from the staff? And from the public? Is there a system for following up? How do we prevent a tip or suspicion from being ignored? How do we respect the rights of our staff while being conscientious about following up suspicions of inaccuracy or deceptiveness?

How do we treat our phone callers? How will we treat them a month or a year from now, after turnover in our clerical staff? Do we have enough people assigned to this work? Is it the first function to go when we tighten staff size?

Should we do a periodic or continuing random telephone check of story accuracy? Can we afford the staffing cost of this?

How do other papers handle this? How should we?

Some newspapers mail an accuracy questionnaire randomly to a sampling of people who figure in their stories. Would we?>>

How do you treat your phone callers? Try this experiment: Gather up a random group of volunteers who do not work at the Times or know anyone there. Give them the Times's main number and see how many, if any, of them can figure out how to get through to a human by calling it. Hire all those, if any, who succeed: they'll make excellent investigative reporters. Should you do random telephone checks of story accuracy? Can you afford that? If you can't afford not just random but regular fact-checking, you really ought to stop calling yourself "the newspaper of record," but then you ought to do that in any case, especially since you've been expunging the record of all freelance contributions ever since you lost the Tasini case in the United States Supreme Court, just because the freelancers you had stolen from wouldn't give you all the rights to their work for nothing so that you could charge them and everybody else to read it.

Some of the recent Times memos seem to answer each other -- one asks "Should we have an ombudsman?" while another announces the appointment of the new ombudsman, so at this point we'll back out and let the memos duke it out amongst themselves for awhile.

  posted by Janet Dagley Dagley @10:21 AM


Powered by Blogger Pro™ SiteUptime Web Site Monitoring Service Site Meter