Home › Blogs › Sarah Burris's blog ›

press

Millennials and Today's Lazy Journalism

Journalism today scares me. I’ll tell you why.

Our generation is investing our time and effort reinvigorating our nation’s civic life. Millennials are rising through the ranks of American society at a time when our team-oriented, pragmatic approach is necessary to successfully combat the problems confronting the U.S. Contrary to our Boomer parents, our activism is inside-out in nature, not outside-in. The way we make change is to infiltrate institutions and transform them from within. This form of activism requires a generation that pays attention to current events, one that leans toward political engagement as opposed to apathy. The political world saw our impact in the 2004 election, as Millennials were the only age group to vote for John Kerry, and it felt it in 2008, with Millennials favoring Barack Obama over John McCain by a 2-1 margin, and providing Obama with most of his margin of victory. While we still have a ways to go in convincing our political parties and the government to recruit more Millennials for positions with decision-making power, I don’t think many would argue that our generation is well on its way to Howe and Strauss’s vision of the generational powerhouse prophesied in Millennials Rising.

What’s surprising to me is that we have made such progress in the face of awful journalism. The tribute to Walter Cronkite following his recent death is appropriate and ironic. The media, dubbed “The Fourth Estate,” wax poetic on Cronkite’s integrity and objectivity, while epically failing to meet these same standards today. More ironic is that examples of these failures were released to the public this week when The Charleston Post and Courier secured and published e-mails between South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s staffers and the leading political journalists of mainstream news outlets. One such example is David Gregory, NBC’s moderator of Meet the Press. TPM Muckraker outlined a particularly concerning exchange taking place between Gregory and Sanford’s then-press secretary, Joel Sawyer.

Gregory's first email to Sawyer was sent at 12:24 p.m. on Wednesday June 24 -- that is, after Sanford had admitted to The State that he had actually been in Argentina, but before the famed stream-of-consciousness press conference where he admitted to an affair. Gregory wrote:

Hey Joel ...
Left you a message. Wanted you to hear directly from me that I want to have the Gov on Sunday on Meet The Press. I think it's exactly the right forum to answer the questions about his trip as well as giving him a platform to discuss the economy/stimulus and the future of the party. You know he will get a fair shake from me and coming on MTP puts all of this to rest.
Let's talk when you can.

Gregory left two different phone numbers.

After the press conference, Sawyer replied:

David --
Thank you very much for taking the time to personally reach out to us. For the time being, we're just going to let what the governor said today stand on its own. If we do some interviews in the future, I'll let you know as soon as possible.

Gregory followed up quickly: "You aren't doing anything at all this week...no other intvus anywhere?" Sawyer replied that they weren't.
Gregory gave it one last shot:

Look, you guys have a lot of pitches .. I get it and I know this is a tough situation ... Let me just say this is the place to have a wider conversation with some context about not just the personal but also the future for him and the party ... This situation only exacerbates the issue of how the GOP recovers when another national leader suffers a setback like this. So coming on Meet The Press allows you to frame the conversation how you really want to...and then move on. You can see (sic) you have done your interview and then move on. Consider it.

Sawyer did not respond.

This exchange is a perfect example of the difference between Cronkite’s journalism skills – the skills we need the media to have today – versus the lacking skill of modern journalists like Gregory. Yes, it’s a business. But we need it to be a noble business, one that uncovers answers and information with the public’s interest at heart. In Gregory’s example, as moderator of MTP, shouldn’t he be framing the conversation? Gregory’s apparent willingness to allow any guest to dictate the direction of the interview is seriously problematic.

If Millennials want to continue to build and reinvigorate our civic institutions for the Twenty-First Century, I suggest we start with the media. Luckily we already have Scoop44 on board, a youth-run media outlet dedicating to chronicling the Obama administration from a youth perspective. Scoop44’s about page frequently describes itself as energetic, perhaps needling the traditional media’s penchant for lazy reporting. We also have a friend in Luke Russert at NBC, following in his dad's footsteps and asking questions about youth issues like the impact of the economy and unemployment on our generation. But in order for us to make the largest mark on society, Millennials need more from today's journalists.

Any thoughts on the state of the media and its relationship with Millennials as we continue to gain more power across the nation?

July 19th, 2009 4:46pm
Tags:

Press Resources: 2008 Youth Vote

Results:

Generation We and the 2008 Election: Generation We and Ruy Teixeira provide a detailed analysis (pdf) of Millennials’ turnout, voting preferences and attitudes in this election, supplemented where appropriate with data from earlier surveys and studies.

Turnout Estimates from CIRCLE: CIRCLE has released estimates on youth turnout. Because precincts are still reporting early and absentee votes, these numbers are instructive but not yet final.

Youth Turnout Advisory: According to CIRCLE, tonight's exit polls will only announce young voter's "share of the electorate." They will not report on hard number of ballots cast or "turnout." Click here for information about what that will mean for your reporting.

Tips for Accurately Reporting Youth Turnout

1. When reporting on youth participation, do not confuse "share of the electorate" with "turnout." Share of the electorate is a measure of the proportion of young voters who cast a ballot in relation to all other voters. Turnout is the percentage of all eligible young voters who cast a ballot. Share measures the influence of young voters within the electorate as a whole. Turnout tells us whether or not more young people showed up at the polls. Please do not confuse them.

2. It is possible for turnout to rise, while share of the electorate remains steady. Indeed, this is exactly what happened in 2004. Young voter turnout (18 - 29) increased by 9 percentage points from 40 to 49% (an increase of about 4.3 million votes). However, young voter's share of the electorate remained steady at 17%.

3. Young voters can only be held accountable for their own actions, not those of the entire electorate. If the youth vote's share of the electorate holds steady from 2004 to 2008, that will mean that older voters also went to the polls in higher numbers. Young voters cannot be held accountable for that. As such, turnout and the hard number of votes are the only accurate measure to gauge the success of efforts to get out young voters.

4. Rising youth turnout is a trend, not a fad tied to the popularity of Senator Obama. Contrary to conventional wisdom, or media reports from 2004, Obama's campaign is not solely responsible for higher youth turnout, though it has played a crucial role during this election cycle. Youth turnout began to rise in 2004, when youth it jumped by 9 percentage points, from 40 to 49%, and 4.3 million more young voters cast a ballot than in 2000. This trend continued in 2006, which saw the first increase in young voter turnout during a midterm election since the 1980s. It reached a new height in early 2008 when youth turnout in the primaries was double that from 2000, the last comparable year. In some states, youth turnout in the primaries was triple or quadruple that of previous years.

5. The margin of victory among young voters may be just as important as the overall increase in youth turnout. In 2004, 20 million young voters cast a ballot, with 54% selecting John Kerry. That gave Kerry an advantage of 1.6 million votes over President Bush among young voters. This year, if 22 million young voters cast ballots and 62% choosing Obama vs. 38% for McCain (numbers roughly found in most polling), that would give Senator Obama an advantage of 5.28 million votes.

6. Youth turnout is about access, not apathy. When young people are registered to vote - they turn out. According to the US Census, 81.6% of all registered young voters actually cast a ballot in 2004. That is on par with other portions of electorate. The more campaigns and independent organizations work to register young voters, and the easier we make the registration process, the higher youth turnout will be.

7. Regardless of youth turnout on Tuesday, young voters have already played a crucial and decisive role in this contest. In the Iowa Democratic caucuses, young voter turnout tripled and their share of caucus-goers was equal to that of the "reliable" 65+ demographic. Obama won the support of 60% of Iowa's youth, catapulting him to the front of the Democratic pack. Similar levels of support from youth in the following primaries and caucuses were the foundation of Obama's primary success.

-------------------


Speak to Youth Vote Leaders:

To arrange an interview, contact Emily Hawkins at emily.hawkins [at] gmail [dot] com or Andrea Hagelgans at andrea [at] spitfirestrategies [dot] com.

Young Democrats of America: Alexandra Acker, Executive Director – The Young Democrats of America (YDA) is the largest youth-led, national, partisan political organization with more than 150,000 members- including middle school, high school and college students as well as young workers, young professionals and young families - in 46 states.

Young Voter PAC: Jane Fleming Kleeb, Executive Director – Young Voter PAC supports candidates who reach out to young voters and include us as an important part of their campaign strategy. Progressive candidates who mobilize young voters and speak to their issues need our help to do it.

Bus Federation: Jefferson Smith, Founder and Chairman - The Bus Federation, comprised of grassroots youth political organizations in five Western states, draws upon its proven models of youth organizing to activate young progressive voters, develop the next generation of progressive leaders, and mobilize for immediate term electoral impact. During one mass canvass (“the Bus Trips”), Bus Federation volunteers typically knock on 4,000 doors in swing districts, harnessing the power of door-to-door voter contact and leveraging volunteer energy to elect progressive candidates, all while building a sense of community around political volunteerism.

Democrats Work: Thomas Bates, Co-Founder and Executive Director – Democrats Work (DW) is a national organization that connects grassroots Democrats with community service projects. DW seeks to foster the civic participation of Democrats in their communities. In the long term, DW aims to transform our nation’s politics: instead of money, we offer work; instead of message, we offer action. In the end, DW envisions a new type of politics: a politics of service.

Future Majority: Mike Connery, Author, Youth to Power: How Today's Young Voters Are Building Tomorrow's Progressive Majority - Future Majority is a blog dedicated to covering the involvement of young voters in progressive politics and includes original reporting on progressive youth organizing, polling analysis, opinion pieces, and guest blogs by leaders in the progressive youth movement.

The League of Young Voters: Rob 'Biko' Baker, Executive Director - The League of Young Voters empowers young people nationwide to participate in the democratic process and create progressive political change on the local, state and national level – with a focus on non-college youth and youth from low-income communities and communities of color.

SAVE: Matthew Segal, Executive Director - Student Association for Voter Empowerment (SAVE) is a national non-profit organization, founded and run by students, with a mission to increase youth voter turnout by removing access barriers and promoting stronger civic education. By encouraging civic awareness and political dialogue on over 30 college campuses throughout the country, SAVE's programs are planting a seed of interest that will continue to drive interest in the working of American government, civic participation on all levels, and the proper accountability of elected officials. matthew [dot] segal [at] savevoting [dot] org

Tags:

Iowa Independent Profiles FM and Millennials

I got interviewed by the Iowa Independent about young voters and the piece turned out to be a profile/issue hybrid about Future Majority. Check it out.

June 25th, 2007 12:48pm
Tags:
Syndicate content