Editor’s Note
Back in the old days — that’s less than a decade and before there were such things as blogs and interactive conversations with readers — editors used to respond to their newspaper readers with an “editor’s note.” Sometimes it clarified a point made in a letter to the editor. Sometimes it offered a correction. Sometimes it was just a simple explanation. An editor’s note was a handful of sentences; maybe a four or five paragraphs. It was always a personal link between the editor and the reader. Only difference between it and today’s blog is the immediacy and the platform. Welcome to Editor’s Note.

Archive for January 8th, 2009

Too critical of Bush? Depends …

Add comment January 8th, 2009

The Pew Research Center does some of the best bench-marking research in the country. The latest research, released today, says, in part: “… Still, a plurality (41%) says press coverage of Bush has been fair, while a substantial majority (61%) says the same about coverage of Obama. About one-in-four find coverage of both not critical enough.”

The entire report includes the breakdowns by party identification. Perhaps, needless to say, party affiliation does change the stats — a lot. But, the important work of the Pew research is in its ability to track the “big picture” or “real people” trends — and that tends to filter out the loudest voices on either end.