Tag Archives: journalism

Feeling more ‘retired’ these days

whyretire

This is the latest in an occasional series of blogs commenting on upcoming retirement.

I’ve mentioned already that I have assumed a new status at one of the four part-time jobs I’ve been working during the past year.

The new on-call/as-needed status means that I’m spending more time at home working my three other jobs, all of which allow me to work from my study.

One of them does require that I leave the house to interview subjects for news stories I write.

But here’s what I’ve discovered about this new phase of my life as I inch toward full retirement: I like the untethered feeling.

What’s more, I’m getting more comfortable with it.

Yes, I have errands to run and things to do around the house. I get to keep posting items on this blog, which gives me great joy as I’m able to comment on this and that.

These days, though, my wife and I spend a good deal of time talking to each other about our future. The conversations almost always involve spending more time with grandchildren, traveling in our recreational vehicle, sprucing up our home and just feeling good these days about our lot in life.

I’m not yet ready to jettison the rest of my jobs. They all involve journalism, which for decades — while I was working full time for The Man — defined me to my friends and acquaintances. It doesn’t define me that much these days, which is the way I want it to be. Still, my work with two TV stations in Amarillo and a weekly newspaper in New Mexico give me great pleasure.

My former career is getting much smaller in that proverbial rear-view mirror. That’s all right, too.

Life is good.

 

Daylight to Standard Time? No biggie

daylight-savings-time-fall

Call me “adaptable.”

Indeed, I might be one of Earth’s most adaptable creatures.

Thirty-four years ago my family and I moved from Oregon, where I’d spent my entire life — less two years in the U.S. Army — and settled in Texas. Culture shock? Boy howdy! Did we adapt? You bet.

Three years ago, my 36-plus-year daily print journalism career came to a sudden end. It wasn’t entirely unexpected. Still, it was an unwelcome end to what I thought had been a pretty successful and productive career. Have I moved on? Yes.

Daylight to Standard Time and back again? Hey, no problem.

I’m not one of those who gripes about the switch to Daylight Savings Time. Nor do I bitch when we return to Standard Time.

I just flow with it.

Moreover, I totally get why the federal government set up Daylight Time. One reason to save energy during the late spring, summer and early autumn months. More daylight meant we spent less time burning our lights and using up valuable electricity.

It bothers some of us. That’s their problem. Not mine.

The only noticeable difference I ever find when we make these switches occurs when we go back to Standard Time, such as what happened this morning.

I woke up damn early, which is the way it’s going to be for a good while. I’m looking at the bright side, though. I won’t be late for anything.

Rise and shine, everyone.

 

 

Jorge Ramos: advocate or journalist?

Illegal-immigrants-2

Jorge Ramos sought to call Donald Trump to account for the Republican presidential candidate’s controversial views on illegal immigration.

He stood during a press conference and peppered the candidate with questions about his plan to build a wall along the nation’s southern border. Trump then called a bodyguard over to escort Ramos from the room.

It was an unattractive scene, to be sure.

Then Ramos, a noted news anchor for Univision — a leading Spanish-language TV network — went on ABC’s “Good Morning America” the next morning to discuss the incident. He said a curious thing, in my humble view.

GMA host George Stephanopoulos asked Ramos if he was acting more as an advocate than a journalist. Ramos responded by saying “journalists must stand for something.”

His answer had me scratching my noggin.

Journalists, as I understand the meaning of the term, basically fall into two categories: reporters and editorialists. I spent most of my nearly 37 years as a full-time print journalist on the opinion side, writing editorials and commentaries for publications in two states.

But on occasion, when the opportunity presented itself, I was able and willing to write news copy for those publications. I was able to set personal bias aside and deliver information for readers to consume — and for them to make up their own minds about the topic about which I was writing.

I don’t know if at the press conference, in which Trump was fielding questions from reporters, whether Ramos was representing himself as a reporter or an editorialist.

His answer to the question, then, on GMA was incomplete.

A journalist, if he is writing or broadcasting opinion, is certainly entitled to “stand for something.” If the journalist is there to report on a story, well, then he or she should stand for nothing.

Jorge Ramos doesn’t think a 1,900-mile-long wall along our border is practical or even feasible. He doesn’t think Trump’s idea of rounding up 11 million undocumented immigrants is possible without breaking up families and causing considerable heartache and grief.

If that is what he believes, then he should simply state it.

If, however, he is asking a serious question on the issue, I believe he should do so without inserting his personal views on the matter.

Perhaps his effort to “stand for something” ought to include fulfilling his entire obligation as a journalist — which includes reporting the story and leaving his own bias out of it.

 

Social Security makes my head spin

This is the latest in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on impending retirement.

This morning my wife and I had a conversation with a woman who manages our retirement account. She is as sharp as they come and she works for one of the financial services giants.

It involved Social Security. I’m about to become fully eligible for SSI benefits. That will happen near the end of the year when I turn 66 years of age.

So, what’s the issue? Easy to do. Just sign up and start collecting the benefit into which I paid for my entire working life. No sweat, right?

Oh, no. Not even close.

I’m likely going to have to jettison one or more of the part-time jobs I’ve been working at since the fall of 2012, shortly after my full-time job as a print journalist came to a screeching halt.

Why is that? I’d make too much money … possibly. If I earn too much income in addition to what Social Security benefits I’d start collecting, the federal government could start taxing me heavily on the SSI income.

Don’t want to do that.

Do I want to wait until I’m 70, at which time the monthly benefit would increase? Probably not. I’m still working those part-time jobs, and by the time I turn 70 1/2 years of age, I need to start withdrawing money annually from the retirement fund my wife and I have built over many years of hard work.

That money becomes part of our taxable income.

So that money also is factored into what the feds can tax us.

At this point, as I listened to our financial adviser explain all this, I could feel the veins in my neck start to throb.

My wife and I had gone downtown to get some answers to a simple question: When is the best time to collect Social Security; do we do it now or do we wait?

It turns out there’s no simple answer to the question. It’s complicated. Highly complicated.

The more I listened to all of these explanations of what happens if we do this or that, or don’t do any of it, the more I began to think that perhaps the tax-simplification advocates out there may be on to something.

Our adviser’s final recommendation: Come back and see me just about the time of your 66th birthday and we’ll see where we stand.

I want to collect the benefit to which I’m entitled. However, these jobs I’m working are providing me with too much fun to give any of them up.

Little did I realize that retirement could be so complicated.

 

 

Dad asked a simple question … and gave birth to a career

It’s kind of late in the day. It’s about to end.

But in the waning hours of Father’s Day, I’ve suddenly gotten filled with the desire to share a brief story about my dad and a simple question he posed to me.

It was late in 1970. I had returned home from a two-year U.S. Army stint. I was preparing to re-enroll in college.

Mom, Dad and I were having dinner one evening at their home, where I returned after my Army hitch.

We were chatting about college, my plans and what I might want to do with my life now that my military obligation was over. I was single, unattached (for the time being) and I had my whole life ahead of me.

Dad asked, “Have you declared a major yet? Do you know what you want to study in college?”

I had not yet made that decision. “Why do you ask?” I said.

Dad responded immediately, “Have you thought about journalism?”

To be honest, I hadn’t given it any thought. “Journalism?” I asked.

Sure, he said. He told me of the letters I wrote home from wherever I was stationed for the previous two years. I wrote home frequently from basic training in Fort Lewis, Wash.; from Fort Eustis, Va., where I went through my advanced training; then from Da Nang, South Vietnam and later, from Fort Lewis, where I was assigned at the end of my tour.

He mentioned how “descriptive” they were. He said I had this ability to turn a phrase. He thought journalism might be a good fit for me, given — he said — my ability to string sentences together.

Oh, gee, why not? So, I returned to college in January 1971, enrolling in some journalism-related classes.

I then fell in love with this craft called “journalism.”

I stayed with it for the next four decades.

I look back at that dinner-time moment with Dad and Mom with great fondness and appreciation for the simple question that Dad asked. It helped me — along with prodding and pushing from the girl who would become my wife in September 1971 — undertake a fruitful and moderately successful career in print journalism.

It’s not yet over, thankfully.

I’m pretty sure I thanked Dad for nudging me down that path. He’s been gone now for 35 years; Mom died 31 years ago. I can’t thank them again now.

However, I can share this memory to remind myself — and perhaps others — of our parents’ wisdom.

In that moment at the dinner table, father definitely knew best.

Brian Williams gone … but then he stays

There are a lot of things I don’t understand in this world.

One of them is how a high-priced broadcast celebrity journalist can stay employed by the network that hired after he violated one of the basic tenets of journalism: to tell the truth.

Brian Williams reportedly is out as anchor of NBC NIghtly News. He’s going to be given some sort of undefined “special assignment” slot on the network’s news team.

My strong hunch is that the one-time golden boy of NBC won’t like the demotion. He’ll likely quit to “pursue other interests.” But in order for him to make his exit cleanly and without too much fuss, the network will have to pay him a lot of money to fulfill the terms of his contract.

You know the story. Williams fibbed about being shot down while riding in a helicopter during the early months of the Iraq War in 2003. He embellished the story with each retelling of it in the years since. Then the network discovered at least 10 or so more incidents of embellishments — or non-truth-telling.

Where I come from, that’s reason to get canned, booted, tossed out on your ear.

Brian Williams violated Rule No. 1 of Journalism 101: tell the damn truth.

He didn’t do it.

He’s been reduced to a punch line at parties. Late-night comedians had a field day over his shame. The Internet is still bubbling with fake depictions of Williams storming ashore at Normandy on D-Day and walking on the moon before Neil Armstrong ever set foot on the place. Others are out there, too.

Whatever project he undertakes at NBC will be viewed, I’m quite sure, with plenty of skepticism from a public whose trust in this guy was shattered because he couldn’t carry out the basic rule of good journalism.

Yes, I am 'living the dream' … honest

This is the latest in an occasional series of blog posts commenting on impending retirement.

You hear it all the time.

“Hey, how ya doin’?”

“Just living the dream, man. Just living the dream.”

You both laugh. It’s kind of a self-deprecating expression — usually — meant to make good-natured fun of one’s lot in life.

I don’t say that to folks because I don’t want anyone to confuse what I mean with what I say. Which is to say that were I to declare I’m “living the dream,” I really and truly mean it.

I’m happy to make the declaration here. Please know that in all sincerity, life is good.

I now am working four — count ’em, four — part-time jobs. They all activities that give me great pleasure.

Three of them involve journalism: blogging for Panhandle PBS (panhandlepbs.org), the Amarillo College-affiliated public TV station; writing news stories for NewsChannel10.com, which is the website for Amarillo’s local CBS-TV affiliate, NewsChannel 10; and helping a friend publish a weekly newspaper, the Quay County Sun, based in Tucumcari, N.M.

My wife reminds me that I am getting paid “to have fun.”

The fourth job is as a concierge for Street Toyota here in Amarillo. My task there? To chat with service customers and to make their experience at Street more enjoyable. That’s what they asked of me when they hired me. I thought, “Heck yeah, I can do that!”

I’ve heard others say as they enter semi-retirement that they “busier’n ever.” I get it. My wife and I are taking time as well to enjoy our life, to travel a bit here and there and to get ready for the day when we can move into full retirement.

My daily grind in print journalism ended more than two years ago. It was a stunning development. I’ve recovered nicely, I’m happy to report.

You won’t hear me say I’m “living the dream.” I don’t want you to think I’m making fun of my lot in life.

The dream is quite real.

 

Opportunity knocks … once again

Old men do have a future, even if it could be fleeting and temporary.

How do I know that? A new door has just opened for me and I’ve decided to walk through it.

I’ve accepted a challenge from a friend and former colleague who’s asked me to help him produce a weekly newspaper in eastern New Mexico. My friend, David Stevens, is looking aggressively for a managing editor for the Quay County Sun in Tucumcari. For the time being — and hopefully not too long — he’s going to rely on yours truly to help him with the task of publishing the Sun.

David — a recent inductee into the Panhandle Press Hall of Fame — edits the Clovis News-Journal and the Portales News-Tribune; the papers’ parent company also owns the Quay County Sun.

Here’s how it went down.

David sent me a text message today, asking me to call when I had a few minutes. I called.

“I’ve got an opportunity for you and you won’t have to leave the house,” David said.

“OK, what’s up?” I asked.

The opportunity provides me with a chance to work with a young reporter in Tucumcari, who’ll send me news budgets weekly. We’ll agree on stories he’ll cover for the next edition of the Sun. The reporter then will draft the stories, he’ll e-mail them to me, I’ll edit the raw copy and send the files back to him.

The Quay County Sun goes to press each Tuesday and is distributed the next day. During the day Tuesday, I’ll receive PDF files of the pages — again via e-mail — from the reporter who’ll build the pages at the Sun’s office in Tucumcari. I’ll proof-read the pages, call the reporter on my phone, recommend changes to the pages. My young colleague will make the changes and then put the pages, in newspaper jargon, “to bed.”

The Quay County Sun publishes about 16 pages weekly. I’m told we’ll be producing eight to 12 pages with news copy on them.

That, as they say, is the new opportunity.

My friend, David, is well aware of my other commitments: the blog I write for Panhandle PBS, the special projects reporting I’m doing for KFDA-TV’s NewsChannel10.com, and my part-time job at an automobile dealership in Amarillo.

This new gig is going to be a first-class blast.

My daily print journalism career may be over, but I keep turning these corners and running smack into unexpected challenges.

As I keep telling my friends and strangers I meet on my daily travels through life … I am having way more fun than I deserve.

Non-endorsement sends dubious message

Let’s talk about newspaper endorsements and what they intend to accomplish.

Editors and publishers will tell you they aren’t intended to make voters cast ballots in accordance with what the newspaper management wants. The folks who run these media outlets seek to stay on the moral high ground. “We just want to be a voice in the community,” they say. “It’s enough just to make people think. We know we cannot make people vote a certain way and that’s not our intention.”

It’s all high-minded stuff. I used to say such things myself when I was editing editorial pages for two newspapers in Texas — one in Beaumont and one in Amarillo — and at a paper in my home state of Oregon.

But the reality, though, is that newspaper executives — publishers and editors — never would complain if elections turn out the way they recommend.

Is there a dichotomy here? I think so.

Which brings me to the Amarillo Globe-News’s non-endorsement today in the upcoming election for mayor. The paper chose to remain silent. It wouldn’t endorse Paul Harpole’s re-election to a third term as mayor, nor would it recommend voters elect Roy McDowell as mayor.

The paper did express a couple of things about Harpole. It said it is disappointed in the missteps and mistakes that have occurred on Harpole’s watch and it also predicted that Harpole would be re-elected on May 9.

Newspapers fairly routinely encourage community residents to get out and vote. They encourage them to make the tough choices. Pick a candidate, the newspaper might suggest. Hey, none of them might not be statesmen or women, but they’re committing themselves to public service.

Suppose for a moment that Amarillo voters — all of them — took the Globe-News’s non-recommendation to heart. What if no one voted for mayor? What if no voter decided that one of the two men seeking the office deserved their vote? Would the paper declare that a victory? Or would it lament the chaos that would ensue?

This is why I disliked non-endorsements back when I toiled for daily newspapers. I’ve always believed voters expect the newspaper to recommend someone in a race, even if no candidate deserved a ringing endorsement. If nothing else, some voters do rely on newspapers to provide some guidance to voters who might not have sufficient knowledge of all the issues that decide these important elections.

Recommending no one? That’s their call. However, it’s fair to wonder whether a newspaper should ask voters to do something its management wouldn’t do, which is make a choice on whom to support at the ballot box.

 

Rolling Stone did a hatchet job

The Rolling Stone retraction of a story it published alleging a gang rape at a college frat house presents a graphic lesson in Journalism 101.

Be sure you get all sides of the story before you go to press.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/04/rolling-stone-rape-columbia-report-116714.html?hp=m1#.VSSXRFJ0yt8

The magazine is paying a huge price in its loss of credibility. And it should.

It well might pay even more — as in financially — if it loses a planned lawsuit filed by some of the principals involved in the coverage of the bogus story.

The magazine reported a woman named Jackie was raped by members of a University of Virginia fraternity. However, the magazine didn’t bother to check with Jackie’s friends, or with the fraternity members, or with others who might be able to corroborate Jackie’s story.

It turned out that on the night in question, there wasn’t even a party at the frat house.

The story broke down.

The magazine issued a retraction and an apology.

And this story now has put the media under the looking glass once again.

What still astounds me is that the reporter, her editors and the “fact checkers” still are employed by the magazine. No one has lost his or her job.

I’m scratching my head over this one. I’ve seen reporters and editors fired for less than what happened at Rolling Stone. No one bothered to check the details of Jackie’s story? No one thought to ask the reporter to talk to the fraternity members? The reporter didn’t bother to do her homework?

Where I come from, they call such so-called reporting a “hatchet job.”

To retract a story is to admit that it is false, that it is bogus, that it doesn’t stand up to the basic test of good journalism. Rolling Stone has issued its retraction.

Why hasn’t it punished the people responsible for soiling the magazine’s credibility?