bogie
Member
Most of the actual work done in media outlets is done by people under 30. They burn through interns and new hires fast... If they last, they get promoted, and boss other new hires. An experienced reporter gets research assistant types.
These folks are gatekeepers of information. They decide what should, and should not, get reported, based upon a formula of relative importance, ratings, reader/viewer demand, and (they'll deny it) advertiser approval.
The ones who survive go onto manage other minions, or into advertising, public relations. The ones who don't survive tend to sell cell phones in the mall.
Most editorial "policies" aren't really policy - A news outlet will have an idea of what its readership, and advertisers, wants. But they are really shaped by the minions at the lower levels. Those are the folks who see your letter to the editor.
If you're still with me, all this leads to a conclusion: In the long term, for gun rights, it is _really_ important that we get to the academic world - especially to people in the mass communications, journalism, broadcasting, etc., departments. If we can get them thinking, and educated and reasonable, about the concept of firearms and self-defense, we've got a _serious_ foot in the door. It won't happen tomorrow. Or next week. But if we can get today's students on our side, next year's minions will be with us. And in a few years, the reporters. And a few years after that, the editors.
Think long term, and be patient.
Your homework assignment for Monday: A nice concise (short, to the point) note to on-campus media outlets - the school newspaper, school TV station, radio, whatever. Keep it low key, and concerned about safety, not so much about guns. Then, follow up with "why can't people who are licensed be on campus?"
We have over 60,000 folks here. I'm guessing a pretty fair number of you have dealings with universities - you're in school, you have kids in school, you're going to be sending kids to school, or you're going to have to take a class yourself. USE THAT.
These folks are gatekeepers of information. They decide what should, and should not, get reported, based upon a formula of relative importance, ratings, reader/viewer demand, and (they'll deny it) advertiser approval.
The ones who survive go onto manage other minions, or into advertising, public relations. The ones who don't survive tend to sell cell phones in the mall.
Most editorial "policies" aren't really policy - A news outlet will have an idea of what its readership, and advertisers, wants. But they are really shaped by the minions at the lower levels. Those are the folks who see your letter to the editor.
If you're still with me, all this leads to a conclusion: In the long term, for gun rights, it is _really_ important that we get to the academic world - especially to people in the mass communications, journalism, broadcasting, etc., departments. If we can get them thinking, and educated and reasonable, about the concept of firearms and self-defense, we've got a _serious_ foot in the door. It won't happen tomorrow. Or next week. But if we can get today's students on our side, next year's minions will be with us. And in a few years, the reporters. And a few years after that, the editors.
Think long term, and be patient.
Your homework assignment for Monday: A nice concise (short, to the point) note to on-campus media outlets - the school newspaper, school TV station, radio, whatever. Keep it low key, and concerned about safety, not so much about guns. Then, follow up with "why can't people who are licensed be on campus?"
We have over 60,000 folks here. I'm guessing a pretty fair number of you have dealings with universities - you're in school, you have kids in school, you're going to be sending kids to school, or you're going to have to take a class yourself. USE THAT.
