This generation of kids...

[ButteMT61]

You said before that academics look down on the political leanings and preferences of the working class (and you suggested they were on the other side of the political spectrum), so it couldn't be that there be Democrats throughout the social structure of our society, just like there are Republicans. Are all union members (most unions representing working class workers) Republicans?Seriously, one's profession does not a political persuasion make. I can reassure you that. Tendencies, sure. But, really, the ones that cry the loudest are the ones that get all the attention and make anything seem like everybody, but that certainly is not the case.

I said there's exceptions, but I strongly suggest that academics are left-leaning as a whole. Hollywood is left-leaning as a whole. You can read stories about people on the "right" telling of challenges with both environments. That as far as I know isn't really something most would argue.I know where the "PC" epidemic came from - and it's not working class folks. "PC" thrives in college environs. I see it with my kids. Observation only.I work in the entertainment industry, as does my wife. You should read the emails from companies regarding politics and PAC's. Come now. It's not like I'm making this stuff up.

 

[sheeplady]

I said there's exceptions, but I strongly suggest that academics are left-leaning as a whole. Hollywood is left-leaning as a whole. You can read stories about people on the "right" telling of challenges with both environments. That as far as I know isn't really something most would argue.I know where the "PC" epidemic came from - and it's not working class folks. "PC" thrives in college environs. I see it with my kids. Observation only.

I'm not taking argument with your perception that academics are "left leaning" but I am taking argument with the idea that the entire working class is "right leaning." There is far, far, far more political diversity among the working class, believe me- I have both sides of my family who are thoroughly working class (many of whom don't even hold high school degrees- so in some cases they probably are seen more as working poor) and they couldn't be diametrically more politically opposed. Much of that is background- one side is "rural" and therefore "conservative" and one side is "urban" and therefore "liberal" (or at least that is the reasoning I have heard screamed over the dinner table. ) And in all my time living with, being raised by, and knowing working class people I've never been able to assume their political affiliation just by knowing where they work, what job they do, etc.

 

[ButteMT61]

I'm not taking argument with your perception that academics are "left leaning" but I am taking argument with the idea that the entire working class is "right leaning." There is far, far, far more political diversity among the working class, believe me- I have both sides of my family who are thoroughly working class (many of whom don't even hold high school degrees) and they couldn't be diametrically more politically opposed. Much of that is background- one side is "rural" and therefore "conservative" and one side is "urban" and therefore "liberal" (or at least that is the reasoning I have heard screamed over the dinner table. ) And in all my time living with, being raised by, and knowing working class people I've never been able to assume their political affiliation just by knowing where they work, what job they do, etc.

Oh, if that's what you got from my post - sorry! No, not the intent at all. I think the working class is more diverse than most "classes" personally. I have family and friends that run the gamut, politically in the working/middle class range. Those in academia and entertainment OTOH are almost all left-leaning. Even the ones who own businesses. Friends back East who own businesses are almost all right-leaning...

 

[Undertow]

Undertow,

Being up in the frozen north, I don't get to see the actual hard copies of the local papers in the USA. But I have never heard much good said about Gannett. The decisions to report fluffier news locally (and hence undermine the actual function of a good local newspaper) sounds like it is coming from higher up. But as for J school grads, I can't see them wanting to go to school just to cover fluff. Some of them must want to be the next Woodward and Bernstein (I hope).

Yes, that is right - I saw very man young, hopeful journalists who go in with the best intentions and come out thinking they're going to have the news-world by the tail. I know I did. That's why I don't blame these kids who go in for the education and hope to come out a bona fide journalist. That's what they've been taught, and that's certainly what they expect.

You know those stories where the young grad gets out of school and thinks he/she is going to jump right into their work like a professional, only to end up relearning everything they'd ever been taught, usually by some old salt that's nearing retirement? That's how I was when I got out, and that's how alot of people I knew ended up, if they even managed to get into the journalism industry. Fortunately, I jumped ship before I was cut - my editor wasn't so lucky. He's rattling change in a can somewhere and I'm eating beef at night. I'm not laughing about it, but it certainly ruined my expectations of journalism.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I doubt very much that most of them today have the slightest idea who "Woodward" and "Bernstein" are.

 

[Chasseur]

I said there's exceptions, but I strongly suggest that academics are left-leaning as a whole. Hollywood is left-leaning as a whole. You can read stories about people on the "right" telling of challenges with both environments. That as far as I know isn't really something most would argue.I know where the "PC" epidemic came from - and it's not working class folks. "PC" thrives in college environs. I see it with my kids. Observation only.

As an academic I normally do not like to enter into these discussions but tally ho!

Generally speaking in the US this depends on the field. Most of the discipline specific national associations (Association of American Geographers, American Historical Association, etc.) do surveys of their members on various things (including political leanings) and have a pretty good idea of the political composition of their members.

Humanities and social sciences in the US do tend to be left-liberal; business and many professional studies programs tend to be more right-conservative. Fields like hard sciences, architecture, etc. are pretty hard judge and are fairly mixed in my experience. Also, specific universities and departments can buck trends, one place I knew tended to surprise people because they had a very liberal theology department and very conservative philosophy department.

If you want a specific approach or political perspective for your learning environment in discipline "X" you can probably find it in the US.

 

[sheeplady]

Oh, if that's what you got from my post - sorry! No, not the intent at all. I think the working class is more diverse than most "classes" personally. I have family and friends that run the gamut, politically in the working/middle class range. Those in academia and entertainment OTOH are almost all left-leaning. Even the ones who own businesses. Friends back East who own businesses are almost all right-leaning...

Ok, I just couldn't understand that because the way I was reading things was like "academics are liberals who look down on the political views of the working class who hold opposite political opinions" and I just couldn't get what the working class political views were supposed to be. And if they were different than liberal, they had to be conservative, and that just boggled my mind given how many liberal working class people I know. I also know a ton of conservative working class people too- hence my confusion.

 

[ButteMT61]

I just happened upon this - have not read it yet.
http://nation.time.com/reinventing-college/

My Dad was conservative when he was younger in the Air Force and a miner before that. Once he crossed over into Academia, he flipped 180º
The last time we got into a political "discussion", in 2008 before Obama was elected (it wasn't pretty, let me tell you) he said to me "I don't know how you and your brother turned out like this..." To that I replied - you brought us up this way Pop! (for the sake of transparency, I'm not D nor R, I'm a moderate with no party affiliations).

 

[sheeplady]

As an academic I normally do not like to enter into these discussions but tally ho!

Generally speaking in the US this depends on the field. Most of the discipline specific national associations (Association of American Geographers, American Historical Association, etc.) do surveys of their members on various things (including political leanings) and have a pretty good idea of the political composition of their members.

Humanities and social sciences in the US do tend to be left-liberal; business and many professional studies programs tend to be more right-conservative. Fields like hard sciences, architecture, etc. are pretty hard judge and are fairly mixed in my experience. Also, specific universities and departments can buck trends, one place I knew tended to surprise people because they had a very liberal theology department and very conservative philosophy department.

If you want a specific approach or political perspective for your learning environment in discipline "X" you can probably find it in the US.

That is a very good description of it. The school I work in (part social science/ education, part business) is about half and half and who believes what is somewhat surprising at times. I've learned to keep my mouth shut because chances are my guess is wrong. I think part of the perception of colleges being liberal is that the more liberal professors tend to more involved in their community by the nature of their discipline, and therefore have the most contact with ordinary folks.

For instance, most Social Work departments tend to be liberal, and you're more likely to have interactions with a social worker in training or a professor of social work involved in some community program than a business student or business professor. Although I have seen many business professors and students be just as involved, their involvement tends to not attract the attention of the media or they are involved "behind the scenes" doing volunteer business work which is hidden from the general population.

 

[Noirblack]

I doubt very much that most of them today have the slightest idea who "Woodward" and "Bernstein" are.

I was really just using them as examples to say that there must be some J school graduates these days who want to do a good job in their chosen profession. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss them all, or even most of them in terms of their intent.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I don't say the kids themselves are bad or stupid -- however, I don't think they emerge from college, degree in hand, any more prepared for a career in journalism than I was two years out of high school with no college at all.

They may *want* to do a good job, and they might even think they're capable of doing one, but my own experience with them as an editor showed me that they had in no way actually been equipped to do one by their education. They were four years older, $20,000 poorer, and woefully unprepared to actually work in their chosen field. The main thing most of them seemed to have learned was how much beer they could hold.

 

[AmateisGal]

That is a very good description of it. The school I work in (part social science/ education, part business) is about half and half and who believes what is somewhat surprising at times. I've learned to keep my mouth shut because chances are my guess is wrong. I think part of the perception of colleges being liberal is that the more liberal professors tend to more involved in their community by the nature of their discipline, and therefore have the most contact with ordinary folks.

For instance, most Social Work departments tend to be liberal, and you're more likely to have interactions with a social worker in training or a professor of social work involved in some community program than a business student or business professor. Although I have seen many business professors and students be just as involved, their involvement tends to not attract the attention of the media or they are involved "behind the scenes" doing volunteer business work which is hidden from the general population.

Here's what bothers me. In one of my graduate history courses on European Colonialism, my professor went into a rant about Bush, oil, and SUVs. I sat there, stunned, and didn't really know what to think since it had absolutely nothing to do with the topic we were studying. One student told him this was neither the time nor the place for it, and the professor eventually shut up and got on with teaching the class.

It's absolutely fine for teachers to have their own political opinions. I have zero problem with that. But when they start shouting those opinions to their class - who is literally a captive audience unless they take the initiative to walk out the door - it's not right. I don't care if they're left OR right on the political spectrum. I don't want my teacher being intolerant of others' opinions simply because they fall on different sides or aren't Democrats or Republicans. I think this happens more often than we know, too.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

Well, many the critical pedagogue would tell you that it is their role to mold your views in the classroom - the perfect forum for pointing out and changing deep-rooted indoctrinations and ideals that cause divisions in society.

But when they start shouting those opinions to their class - who is literally a captive audience unless they take the initiative to walk out the door - it's not right. I don't care if they're left OR right on the political spectrum. I don't want my teacher being intolerant of others' opinions simply because they fall on different sides or aren't Democrats or Republicans. I think this happens more often than we know, too.

 

[Noirblack]

I don't say the kids themselves are bad or stupid -- however, I don't think they emerge from college, degree in hand, any more prepared for a career in journalism than I was two years out of high school with no college at all.

They may *want* to do a good job, and they might even think they're capable of doing one, but my own experience with them as an editor showed me that they had in no way actually been equipped to do one by their education. They were four years older, $20,000 poorer, and woefully unprepared to actually work in their chosen field. The main thing most of them seemed to have learned was how much beer they could hold.

Your experience is yours, so who am I to doubt it?

Please clarify something for me. You say these graduates emerged from college and they are not "any more prepared for a career in journalism than [you were] two years out of high school with no college at all."

Are you saying they were equal to you in their preparations for a journalism career, or compared to you they were less prepared for such a career?

Also, are you making these comments with reference only to the graduates that you worked with, or would you say that about all graduates who go on to work in journalism?

Finally, are you saying this about all college graduates or just J school graduates?

 

[sheeplady]

Here's what bothers me. In one of my graduate history courses on European Colonialism, my professor went into a rant about Bush, oil, and SUVs. I sat there, stunned, and didn't really know what to think since it had absolutely nothing to do with the topic we were studying. One student told him this was neither the time nor the place for it, and the professor eventually shut up and got on with teaching the class.

It's absolutely fine for teachers to have their own political opinions. I have zero problem with that. But when they start shouting those opinions to their class - who is literally a captive audience unless they take the initiative to walk out the door - it's not right. I don't care if they're left OR right on the political spectrum. I don't want my teacher being intolerant of others' opinions simply because they fall on different sides or aren't Democrats or Republicans. I think this happens more often than we know, too.

Well, there are some contexts where political discussion is appropriate. For instance, I have training as a gerontologist. Any good aging and society course should have a political discussion of social security, Medicare, Medicaid, the AARP, etc. Instructors are going to have their own views (and quite frankly, you'd be hard pressed to find a gerontologist who doesn't support social security) and I think keeping them hidden doesn't lend objectivity. I teach risk management and my students often have political discussions about regulation- perfectly acceptable.

In other contexts, I agree that it isn't appropriate. I once had a high school teacher who told everybody in the class that we were all going to hell unless we accepted Jesus Christ and it made her cry every night. Fortunately I liked the teacher, but that's not appropriate in a classroom. If anything, that's so much worse than hearing some political speech a person doesn't agree with.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I found them substantially less prepared. They had very poor writing skills -- their copy was invariably too long, too convoluted, and not suited for broadcasting, and they usually took it personally when I tossed out their stuff and rewrote it. They seemed to have little concept of operating on deadlines, feeling that they should have days to complete an assignment instead of the deadlines of hours that our newsroom required, and they didn't like the odd hours they were required to work, not seeming to understand that covering municipal government means working according to its hours, not your own. They had been prepared for none of this by their education. College radio was, and still is, nothing like the real world of commercial radio and a disservice was done to them in leading to expect that the experiences they gained there would be of much use in the real world. Not coming from that background myself, I had the advantage of not having to unlearn all the bad habits and false expectations I would otherwise have received.

As for the rest of your questions, I believe I was quite clear in my previous posts who and what I was talking about.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Well, many the critical pedagogue would tell you that it is their role to mold your views in the classroom - the perfect forum for pointing out and changing deep-rooted indoctrinations and ideals that cause divisions in society.

I'd have a pretty hard time paying anyone twenty grand a year to mold my views.

 

[AmateisGal]

Exposing people to different points of view is one thing, and that is a GOOD thing. Telling your students that they are wrong for thinking the opposite way you do is not. Here's what I'm trying to say: the same shameful political discourse - i.e. my side is RIGHT and your side is WRONG - also appears in the classrooms of universities. The professor in question that I alluded to above basically made the assumption - to the whole class, I might add - that the student who questioned him was beneath him for not believing the same way. THAT is what I am against.

If you disagree, discuss it rationally - look at it from both points of view and consider both sides. That, IMO, is what a teacher should do. Disparaging the student for their beliefs because they conflict with yours is NOT the teacher's role.

I absolutely agree that politics must come up in some courses - political science, for one - and I expect there are some very heated exchanges that occur in those classes. But if your professor is, for example, an ardent liberal, and there is a conservative in the class, and the professor makes no bones about his or her absolute disdain for conservatives, how is that going to "mold" anyone's mind? To my way of thinking, it's going to entrench those very same beliefs further.

 

[AmateisGal]

I also might add that I had every intention of going on to get my PhD after I earned my master's, but that I became disillusioned with the way I was taught and the overall atmosphere of the university itself. I chose to get my master's degree and leave it at that, and I have not regretted it. Academia just wasn't for me, and I must say that part of my decision was based on witnessing the intolerance for other people's views that turned me off. This is my own experience and certainly doesn't speak for academia as a whole. That being said, I had some very good teachers - my advisor being one - that I learned a great deal from and am still in contact with today.

 

[Noirblack]

I found them substantially less prepared. They had very poor writing skills -- their copy was invariably too long, too convoluted, and not suited for broadcasting, and they usually took it personally when I tossed out their stuff and rewrote it. They seemed to have little concept of operating on deadlines, feeling that they should have days to complete an assignment instead of the deadlines of hours that our newsroom required, and they didn't like the odd hours they were required to work, not seeming to understand that covering municipal government means working according to its hours, not your own. They had been prepared for none of this by their education. College radio was, and still is, nothing like the real world of commercial radio and a disservice was done to them in leading to expect that the experiences they gained there would be of much use in the real world. Not coming from that background myself, I had the advantage of not having to unlearn all the bad habits and false expectations I would otherwise have received.

As for the rest of your questions, I believe I was quite clear in my previous posts who and what I was talking about.

I can't quite tell if you are referring to people who merely worked at college radio stations, people who graduated with a BA and tried a career in radio, or people who graduated from J school. But I can easily see where communication difficulties could have occurred in your workplace. For the purposes of discussion I will assume you are talking about J school graduates.

It sounds as if the HR people at your radio station did a bad job of screening applicants and explaining the nature of the job to them. I would never say that a J school graduate is 100 per cent ready to perform at top level from day one on the job. Any reasonable person would expect that there is some transition time between school and the work world - even for people who are highly educated. For example, lawyers article before being called to the bar. Doctors intern before they can practice on their own. Most times I've read an interview with any CEO about education today they note that they have to take grads from various programs and give them some additional skills and knowledge once they start work. There is nothing new or wrong about that.

It would be a strange world indeed if somehow all J school grads were less qualified to work in radio than a high school grad. I think some J school grads must be good at their chosen profession. Perhaps it was something about the candidate selection process at your station that failed to screen out the ones who couldn't adjust.