CJR calls for more

This is journalism.

I'm happy to finally be able to blog about something positive. There's a key line in this article on attack ads called "Double Negative" from the Columbia Journalism Review. It's independent media, while not necessarily at its finest, doing its job at the least.

A group called the Wisconsin Advertising Project at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, did a study that analyzed all campaign ads by candidates John McCain and Barack Obama. The study placed each ad into one of three categories: positive, negative and contrast. Conclusion of the study: Both campaigns are equally as negative.

But then CJR stepped in and offered a novel idea to too many outlets, which was taking the study a step further. It's hard to blame the study itself. Based on the criteria for categories, the result makes sense. However, it fails to realistically portray the situation and truth. What's worse is the media just eat it up, which the CJR article shows with clear-cut examples.

It's just plain lazy to take a study like this and generalize. But that's what multiple media outlets are doing and CJR has called them out. In a way, that's positive.