Stroger Makes Hollywood Play
Put Down Your Nanowrimo And Leave The House
Sox Shuffle Continues
Jay-Z Announces 2010 Tour Dates. Chicago Not On List.
The Sun-Times interviewed hundreds of first-through-eighth graders and found that "half of all fifth- through eighth-graders said their 'greatest fear' was gun- or shooting-related." According to the report, "nearly three-quarters" of fifth-through-eighth graders said they heard gun shots in their neighborhood, and nearly two-thirds of fifth-graders "specifically listed guns or a shooting as their biggest fear."
The students surveyed attend schools in Lawndale, West Town and Woodlawn, and the Sun-Times says the survey "offer[s] a broad snapshot of student experiences from three schools with different levels of exposure to violence."
In the "How we surveyed Chicago students" sidebar, the Sun-Times says kids were asked five questions about guns and gun violence and then asked what they're afraid of. Is it possible that students would have responded differently had the survey not been asking about guns initially? Were any stories at all verified with any sort of police or hospital records? Were students in less violent areas questioned as a control group? While the findings are indeed harrowing, the story would carry more weight were its methodology a little sounder. [S-T]
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Sound methodology? come on were talking about the sun times. It has as much journalistic wieght as the globe or ok rag. the sun times is garbage except for sports or the occasional scandal.
Dear god. They actually PUBLISHED that on the FRONT PAGE?
Fed Up nailed it. There's no methodology, just yellow journalism. How different is this from William Randolph Hearst having an actress faint on a new york street and timing the first responders more than a century ago?
They went out and made a story. Not found, or investigated or studied, made.
And on a very simple level, who is NOT afraid to be shot? As a kid "are you scared of getting shot?" What are they going to say? "No, sounds like fun, do you have a gun?"
This makes me long for the days of my childhood, when my biggest fear was Reagan pissing off the U.S.S.R. and they dropped an atomic bomb on us.
I agree.
These "survey" questions were incredibly leading. Of course the most common fear across all schools surveyed was gun-related, because that was the topic.
I wonder if they asked the same question about pit bulls, children would report "being bit by a pit bull" as their greatest fear? I wonder if students would volunteer their stories of friends and family members getting bit by dogs?
Make no mistake: gun violence is an issue in these schools. I wish they would survey the parents of these students and ask them what they are doing to minimize gun violence in their neighborhood and schools? The police can do a lot, but until people take back their neighborhood, I think gun violence will continue to rise.
Arrgh! I was so looking forward to the cover of the Sun-Times this morning. I was hoping for a brilliant photo of last night's storm with a horrible caption next to it. I was expecting either the movie-poster caption, like ONE BIG STORM or DROWNED, or a local quote from someone caught in the rain that read "I COULDN'T SEE IN FRONT OF ME".
Instead, I get some dumb-ass 'report' that they were working on for weeks and probably advertised that they were releasing today. Of course kids in Lawndale are worried about getting shot, it's Lawndale.
yeah, it was a poorly written story. Especially the part where it said, describing the kids answers,
"Kids used terms their peers would probably never have thought to use 20 years ago."
I know violence against CPS students is the shark attack-esque Chicago journalism meme right now, but actually, Chicago's homicide rate peaked in 1992. And if memory recalls 1988 was pretty bad, too. Maybe the authors have heard of There Are No Children Here, which was set that year.
Allow me to add some more gasoline to the fire.
Who is to say that some of the kids aren't lying?
Either because it makes them sound tough ("I know a guy who was shot. My cousin's friend's Uncle's Brother") or because they are kids and enjoy putting one over. Especially on some overly earnest reporter who likely looked at them with all the doe-eyed pity of Sally Struthers peering at famine victims.
Of course guns and gangs are an issue, and it's heart-breaking that these kids have to deal with this kind of violence. But this story does NOTHING. It's emotional pap. Something for the good decent white people to cluck their tongues at and say "There but for the grace of god..."
It's sensationalist, exploits the kids and the issue and the design is just eye-gougingly bad.
The kids see the front page of the Sun-Times every day while going to school.
That's why they're afraid of getting shot.
Will the mayor & Pfleger now offer a bounty for every ST turned in?
Dear Sun-Times:
Thank you for that breakthrough article.
I'll bet you bumped a "hottest fan" follow-up story to plaster that drawing on the front page.
We get it. Kids are being shot. Why don't you throw in another Editorial supporting Mayor Mumbles and his dopey gun ban? Or profile some more phony "reverends?" In fact, I'd like to see if those reverends can draw a picture that well.
At least it wasn't an "acedemic" study that costs half a million dollars
I agree with the commenter who suggested surveying the parents. I would have asked the parents (with NO leading questions) what their greatest fear for their children was. That's a better survey.
this is hilarious. the online pickpocket that is chicagoist all of a sudden is a journalism profesor/media critic.
this criticism would have some credibility if it came from someone who actually does reporting, as opposed to copying and pasting stories from the Mainstream Media sites you love to hate.
keep beating those drums for the demise of "S-T" and "Trib" as you slyly attribute them. Once they're gone the -ist will be very busy. or follow in their wake.
Not to defend this story--it certainly wasn't the strongest effort, but wasn't as misguided and pretending as you would-be investigative aces claim--but, you know, if you can do this type of stuff better, by all means, go for it. Report and write important stories about this city and region and help improve the situation here. The city could use all the strong journalism it can get. I might even pay for it. I've contributed decent sums of money to other efforts to do more local (original) reporting on the Web.
What Been Hecht said, too--100% right. Some of you don't even realize the irony he points out. I mean, do the business models for these types of blogs even include the possibility of original reporting on things other than concerts, food and music (which is often done very well, of course)?
Matilda:
You write: "if you can do this stuff better, by all means, go for it." That's like saying if you don't like Blago, run for governor. You make it sound so easy. It's a weak argument. You don't like the way someone does [insert profession here], then you should do it? I expect more from you.
Is wrong to be critical of a newspaper or a newspaper article? I recall many being quite critical of the teen driving report in the Trib in the past (which was a better special report than this).
You are correct: the city does need all of the strong journalism it can get. But first you admit that this isn't the strongest effort, then criticize those that agree.
There is not business model for blogs in general. How many blogs do you know do original reporting? If you know of any, please let us know. I wish that blogs would do more original reporting. What is the name of your blog so I can see your original reporting? You do have one, right?
I think that this article, like many articles in various newspapers, states the obvious. This S-T special report is leading and weak. I think that they could do so much more with something like this. Such as: interview the parents. Ask more open-ended questions. Compare the schools that they interviewed with other schools on the south or west sides that have not had students killed. Do those students also fear gun violence? Why is it wrong to question their methodology?
But hey, what do I know? I'm not a journalist.
Sparky: Fair enough. Just annoyed when people who get news plucked for them by blogs to turn around and be so critical of the MSM--biting the hand that feeds them, in a way.
How do you know that the people above got the news from Chicagoist? I, for one, read it first at S-T. That's a big assumption you're making. For many, the MSM is the primary source; the blogs are secondary.
Sorry. Just annoyed when people read other's comments, point out the irony in those comments, then forget the irony of their own.
Sparky: Let's see: The keepers of this site, as happens on other such sites, regularly pluck original reporting from other sources. One keeper of this site, in the original post, bit the hand that fed her. Nothing wrong with criticism of anything, but let's keep the relationship between blogs such as this one and the dreaded, stupid MSM in mind, too. Blogs would have much less to write about were it not for the MSM and its often silly or dumb stories (as though blogs don't run superficial, shallow crap all the time, as though blogs don't encourage superficial and shallow thinking all the time, as evidenced by many comments.) Already, acting superior to the hand that fed this blog has resulted in more than a dozen posts and, I assume, more hits. Not bad for a day's work, eh?
Clear enough? A
In any case, Been H. said it better than I am.
Matilda:
I see it differently, and I fail to see how criticizing a paper is beating the drums for their demise, as Been said.
I don't want to see the ST or the Trib go down. If they do, there is less accountability from our govenment, for starters. Who is reporting on the news? Who is bringing the crap that goes on in this city to the citizens' attention? Chicagoist certainly won't. Nor will many other mainstream blogs. Perhaps local magazines and papers, but they do not get the same attention as the big ones.
Of course blogs would have much less to write about if it was not for the MSM. Of course they pluck material from orginal sources. While the definition is evolving, isn't that one of the very definitions of a blog--a commentary/opinion on original material? (I think the exception is blogs that are part of newspapers. They may do original reporting).
The author of this post states: "While the findings are indeed harrowing, the story would carry more weight were its methodology a little sounder." Is that wrong? There are a handful of other sites that I can think of that do the same thing. (Beachwood Reporter comes to mind). Is this really biting the hand that feeds them?
I don't really see it that way. First: this post has links to the original source. If people have not already, they will read the original material (generating more hits on the ST site). Second, people comment on the article itself--on this blog, and perhaps others. Maybe someone will write a letter to the editor. Maybe this will generate momentum for something bigger.
Please, continue to ask more from a blog. It is imporant to improve this type of media.
I think you fail to see the irony in your statements. You are often commenting in those shallow posts (hell, you are ranked #4 in comments on this site) and generating hits for this site. While many of your posts are intelligent and thoughtful, you also engage in meaningless banter...just like the rest of us.
Are movie and music critics "biting the hand that feeds them" if they criticize the way a movie is made? No, they are considered doing their job and being objective about the material they have found that is being reviewed in comparison to other material of similar nature that they have received in the past. But, yes, sans movies, they would be out a job, right?
How is this any different?