Who Covers the Team? The Coach Will Decide.

DEREK DOOLEY, THE University of Tennessee football coach, told journalists last week that only certain reporters would be given access to a mock game the team played.

The journalists selected were allowed in, he said, as "a simple reward for exemplary performance."

Should a coach be allowed to decide who gets to cover his team?

Should Journalists Rate the Teachers?

THE LOS ANGELES TIMES recently examined every third through fifth grade teacher in LA schools and measured them for effectiveness using a controversial method.

Then they created a searchable database and published it online.

The teachers freaked out.

"It is the height of journalistic irresponsibility to make public these deeply flawed judgments about a teacher's effectiveness," the LA teachers' union wrote in a statement. "The database will cause chaos at school sites, as parents scramble to get their children into classes taught by teachers labeled as 'effective' by a newspaper."

Is it the role of the newspaper (or the media in general) to do such research? Should they have made the results public?

Have the teachers rights been violated?

How Far Would You Go to Get a Story?

BARRY LEVINE, A TEMPLE grad, executive editor of the National Enquirer and friend of J1111, recently recounted to New York magazine his fondest memories of life in tabloid journalism:

When his helicopter was blasted with shotgun pellets over Don Johnson and Melanie Griffith’s wedding; when Mike Tyson dragged him into a hotel stairwell and threatened to kill him after Levine asked if he was gay; when his news team was “attacked” by a swarm of tarantulas after sneaking onto Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch; when he had two reporters cross a meadow wearing a sheep costume to get inside Michael J. Fox’s nuptials; when he sent ten operatives into a hospital dressed as doctors and nurses with clipboards rigged with tiny cameras to snap the first pictures of Lisa Marie Presley’s baby.

Would you wear a sheep costume to sneak into a wedding just to get a story? Would you pose as a doctor to get pictures otherwise unavailable? Is there anything wrong with that?

The National Enquirer, which unabashedly pays for information, broke the story of presidential candidate John Edwards' affair (with a woman who gave birth to his child) and was considered for a Pulitzer Prize for that investigation.

How far should journalists go to get a story?

By Explaining the Details of the Proposed Mosque, Are Journalists Showing Their Bias?

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS issued a memo to staffers last week regarding how the proposed Lower Manhattan mosque should be referenced in their coverage. Among the directives was a change in what the mosque would be called - rather than simply the "ground zero mosque," the AP told staffers to refer to it as the mosque "near" ground zero.

"The nearness of the mosque to the WTC site is, of course, at the root of the whole controversy," wrote AP standards editor Tom Kent. "There's nothing we would or could do to conceal that. But 'ground zero mosque' leaves the impression that the mosque is right where the World Trade Center stood. In fact, the site of the proposed mosque and Islamic center is not at ground zero, but two blocks away in a busy retail area."

Opponents of the mosque immediately jumped on the AP, saying they were taking sides in the issue (generally, the liberal/ Democratic/ pro-Muslim-side). Conservative pundit Michelle Malkin called the AP memo "a re-tread of a pro-mosque talking points memo."

The AP responded to criticism by saying they are only providing factual information.

"Readers are entitled to know the geographical facts of the situation," Kent continued. "Then they can judge it for themselves."

Are they taking sides by clarifying the situation?

How Did You Spend Your Summer Vacation?

FOR SIX WEEKS, 18 Temple University students documented London as part of the School of Communications & Theater's study abroad program.

Our focus was on London's massive and diverse music scene but we also learned about the food, fashion, lifestyles and various cultures of the city.

We interviewed countless people, including producers and a correspondent from the London office of NBC News, the publishers of STATION magazine and the operators of the Roundhouse (a creative arts incubator for young people, as well as popular music venue).

We traveled to Stonehenge, Bath and Brighton. We cruised the Regent's Canal on a boat, drank tea at the Orangery at Kensington Palace, toured Fuller's Brewery and saw a lot of good concerts.

You can learn more about our musical adventures here. You can see what we learned about London here. And you can see our images from London here.

The SCT London program runs during the spring and fall semesters as well as during summer session II. Click here for more info.

Did Time Mag Cheat Rolling Stone (Or Just Scoop Them on Their Own Story)?

ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE did a huge story about Stanley McChrystal, the commander of allied forces in Afghanistan, and his criticism's of the Obama administration. As a result of the story, McChrystal tendered his resignation to the president - his remarks in the article, which he admits are accurate, could be considered as insubordinate.

But there is another controversy surrounding the story: Time magazine published the Rolling Stone story online in full pdf version nearly two days before Rolling Stone did - and nearly five days before the Rolling Stone print issue hit the street. Another site ran the pdfs as well but that page has since been removed.

Rolling Stone sent advance copies of the newest issue to media outlets before going to press - like many magazines do - as a way of drumming up publicity. They said that they did not give pdf versions to Time, nor did anyone from Time contact them for permission to run the pdfs online.

Was Time just doing good journalism by beating Rolling Stone to their own story? Or did Time violate Rolling Stone's copyright by printing pdfs without authorization?

The Journalists Admit Falsifying the Image. So, We're All Good, Right?

OUTSIDE MAGAZINE PUBLISHED a cover story about cyclist Lance Armstrong. He posed in a plain blue T-shirt for the cover shoot. But when the mag hit the streets, Armstrong discovered that his shirt now read, "38. BFD."

Apparently, the article alludes to the idea that Armstrong being 38-years old is no "big f***ing deal."

He was pretty fired up when he saw the altered cover. He tweeted:

Just saw the cover of the new Outside mag w/ yours truly on it. Nice photoshop on a plain t-shirt guys. That's some lame bullshit. #weak

Is there anything wrong with PhotoShopping the cover to make it more appealing to readers?

"We wanted to create a provocative image and make a bold statement about the fact that, because of Armstrong's age, many cycling fans are skeptical of his chances in this year's Tour de France," Outside's editors wrote in defense of their action.

The magazine actually placed a note on the cover reading: Not Armstrong's real T-shirt.

Does that make anything better? Does Armstrong have a legit reason to be upset?

Does it make any difference that PhotoShopping mag covers is a regular practice?