"Letters address governor, funding"
From staff reports
The Daily Evergreen
"New college graduates facing tough job market"
USA Today
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Questions for Bill Morlin
1. Being a student at Washington State University, a school closely located to Spokane, I have covered the Jim West scandal in nearly every communication class. In my ethics class, we discussed whether the investigative reporting done by the Spokesman-Review (and inherently, yourself) was ethical. Looking back, would you have done anything differently?
2. Do you really believe that the Jim West story was a need to know or a want to know? Especially considering that the FBI never found any information indicating that he was abusing his office. And he was never linked the the sexual abuse scandal in the 70s.
3. Where do you draw the line in investigative journalism? Arguably, Mayor Jim West's reputation was severely tarnished, does selling a newspaper come at the expense of other people's lives?
4. Do you believe it is the role to watchdog government's, corporations and society? Is this where journalism is headed or has it always been this way?
5. Why you do find investigative journalism important in today's society?
6. Why do you think the Polygimist sect went unchecked for so long? It wasn't until teenagers started giving birth that people started paying attention. Wouldn't the idea of polygamy be taboo enough to catch society's attention?
7. Or, is it that it's too taboo for today's readers? We'd rather that the topic just not exist at all and it wasn't until a more socially accepted taboo was exposed that we began to look at the larger picture? Is this the role of investigate journalists? Find one piece of a story and use it as a tool to expose a larger trend?
2. Do you really believe that the Jim West story was a need to know or a want to know? Especially considering that the FBI never found any information indicating that he was abusing his office. And he was never linked the the sexual abuse scandal in the 70s.
3. Where do you draw the line in investigative journalism? Arguably, Mayor Jim West's reputation was severely tarnished, does selling a newspaper come at the expense of other people's lives?
4. Do you believe it is the role to watchdog government's, corporations and society? Is this where journalism is headed or has it always been this way?
5. Why you do find investigative journalism important in today's society?
6. Why do you think the Polygimist sect went unchecked for so long? It wasn't until teenagers started giving birth that people started paying attention. Wouldn't the idea of polygamy be taboo enough to catch society's attention?
7. Or, is it that it's too taboo for today's readers? We'd rather that the topic just not exist at all and it wasn't until a more socially accepted taboo was exposed that we began to look at the larger picture? Is this the role of investigate journalists? Find one piece of a story and use it as a tool to expose a larger trend?
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Because 'We' Post on Blogs...
I thought this was interesting, especially since as a class we all post on our blogs for school and this was a University that was punishing a student for her blog postings. It really affects me because I write stories about WSU and am somewhat critical.
Nina Yoder was a nursing student at the University of Louisville in Kentucky. On March 2, 2009 the school dismissed Yoder stating that she had violated the school’s honor code by “posting blog items concerning patients activities and naming the university on her MySpace page” (Associated Press, 2009). Yoder’s attorney, Daniel Canon, is arguing that the postings were mostly political and did not identify patients. The nursing student’s blog covered topics including suicide, religion, sex, guns and politics. “She mentioned the university several times but revealed no patient names in postings” (Associated, 2009). The University of Louisville told Yoder she could not continue in the nursing program because of her blog posts. As a result, the University labeled Yoda as a “persona non grata”, literally “an unwelcome person” and was immediately withdrawn from classes.
Yoder appealed to U.S. District Judge Charles Simpson on March 13, 2009. She asked the court to issue an injunction that would allow her to return to classes and graduate in August. A hearing has not yet been scheduled to hear Yoder’s motion. Yoder’s case mirrors a national trend among colleges and universities seeking to exercise some control over what students are able to do and say off campus and on the Internet. “Students at universities around the country, including high-profile cases in Georgia and Colorado, have faced disciplinary action for their online postings” (Associated, 2009).
Yoder’s attorney, Daniel Canon, argues that his client’s right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression, as granted by the First Amendment, has been violated by the University of Louisville. All nursing students at the University of Louisville sign an honor code that states, “[all students must adhere to] the highest standards of honesty, integrity, accountability, confidentiality, and professionalism” (Associated, 2009). Though Yoder had signed this document, Canon argues, “Public institutions can’t restrict speech. [The honor code is] too vague and regardless of the code any attempts to limit student speech are unconstitutional” (Bullard, 2009). In addition, while Yoder was granted the right to appeal her dismissal, which was denied, she was offered no hearing to present evidence and witnesses in her defense.
In Tinker v. Des Moines School District, 393 U.S. 502 (1969), the Supreme Court upheld the right of students to express their views in a quiet, symbolic manner that is non-disruptive to the educational process. Three high school students wore black armbands to school to protest American involvement in Vietnam. This act violated a recently adopted Des Moines, Iowa school district policy against such expression. As a result, the three students were suspended from school. The federal district court and the court of appeals found in favor of the school district. The lower court decision was reversed by the Supreme Court. In the majority opinion written by Justice Fortas states, “conduct by the student, in class or out of it, which for any reason—whether it stems from time, place, or type of behavior—materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech” (Tedford and Herbeck, 2005).
According to the Tinker decision, Yoder should be allowed to return to school and graduate in August. Yoder’s MySpace blog posed no disruptions to the classroom environment. In addition, the blog posts were a form of political expression conducted in a non-disruptive manner according to time, place, and manner restrictions and should therefore be protected by the First Amendment.
Lacking many traditional barriers, the Internet has rapidly become a medium for a wide range of expression. Unlike traditional media outlets, the Internet has no gatekeepers. Because of this, it has become a forum for political speech and individual expression. In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress included a provision known as the Communication Decency Act (CDA). The CDA contained two provisions that were aimed at protecting minors from “indecent” and “patently offensive” communications on the Internet. Several plaintiffs, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the CDA. In 1996, a special three-judge court panel unanimously declared the CDA unconstitutional (ACLU v. Reno, 929 F.Supp. 824 (E.D. Pa. 1996)). They argued that the law was inherently vague because “indecent” was not defined in the law and it prohibited speech that was legal for adults. The government then appealed to the Supreme Court, which held that the CDA was unconstitutional. This was the Supreme Court’s first decision on free speech in cyberspace.
The Supreme Court held that the CDA did indeed violate the First Amendment. Furthermore, they held that Internet speech was entitled to the highest degree of First Amendment protection. Due to the Supreme Court’s decision in Reno v. ACLU, it would be argued that Yoder’s MySpace blog does indeed enjoy First Amendment protection because speech found on the Internet is constitutionally protected. This is further compounded by the fact that political speech is constitutionally protected as long as it does not violate time, place and manner restrictions as annunciated in Hague v. CIO (1939), Schneider v. State (1939), Cox v. New Hampshire (1941) and Jamison v. Texas (1943). Yoder’s MySpace blog was created privately as a tool to release stress and it did not disrupt the education environment.
In United States v. Baker, 890 F.Supp. 1375 (E.D. Mich. 1995), a student at the University of Michigan posted a graphic narrative on a website which described the torture, rape and murder of a woman. In another story, the victim had the same name as one of the student’s classmates. A grand jury indicted the student for violating a statute that prohibited interstate communication of threats to injure or kidnap an individual. Baker’s attorney argued that the threats were not “true threats” and were therefore protected expression. Federal district judge Avern Cohn argued, “statements expressing musings, considerations of what it would be like to kidnap or injure someone, however unsavory, are not constitutionally actionable… absent some expression of an intent to commit the injury or kidnapping” (Tedford, 2005).
Based on the Baker decision, Yoder should be allowed to resume classes at the University of Louisville. The University of Louisville administration cited the gun-related postings as a reason for her dismissal. Yoder was merely expressing her opinions regarding gun-rights and posed no true threat to university administrators, teachers or students. Therefore, Yoder’s should be reinstated to the university’s nursing program.
Nina Yoder was a nursing student at the University of Louisville in Kentucky. On March 2, 2009 the school dismissed Yoder stating that she had violated the school’s honor code by “posting blog items concerning patients activities and naming the university on her MySpace page” (Associated Press, 2009). Yoder’s attorney, Daniel Canon, is arguing that the postings were mostly political and did not identify patients. The nursing student’s blog covered topics including suicide, religion, sex, guns and politics. “She mentioned the university several times but revealed no patient names in postings” (Associated, 2009). The University of Louisville told Yoder she could not continue in the nursing program because of her blog posts. As a result, the University labeled Yoda as a “persona non grata”, literally “an unwelcome person” and was immediately withdrawn from classes.
Yoder appealed to U.S. District Judge Charles Simpson on March 13, 2009. She asked the court to issue an injunction that would allow her to return to classes and graduate in August. A hearing has not yet been scheduled to hear Yoder’s motion. Yoder’s case mirrors a national trend among colleges and universities seeking to exercise some control over what students are able to do and say off campus and on the Internet. “Students at universities around the country, including high-profile cases in Georgia and Colorado, have faced disciplinary action for their online postings” (Associated, 2009).
Yoder’s attorney, Daniel Canon, argues that his client’s right to freedom of speech and freedom of expression, as granted by the First Amendment, has been violated by the University of Louisville. All nursing students at the University of Louisville sign an honor code that states, “[all students must adhere to] the highest standards of honesty, integrity, accountability, confidentiality, and professionalism” (Associated, 2009). Though Yoder had signed this document, Canon argues, “Public institutions can’t restrict speech. [The honor code is] too vague and regardless of the code any attempts to limit student speech are unconstitutional” (Bullard, 2009). In addition, while Yoder was granted the right to appeal her dismissal, which was denied, she was offered no hearing to present evidence and witnesses in her defense.
In Tinker v. Des Moines School District, 393 U.S. 502 (1969), the Supreme Court upheld the right of students to express their views in a quiet, symbolic manner that is non-disruptive to the educational process. Three high school students wore black armbands to school to protest American involvement in Vietnam. This act violated a recently adopted Des Moines, Iowa school district policy against such expression. As a result, the three students were suspended from school. The federal district court and the court of appeals found in favor of the school district. The lower court decision was reversed by the Supreme Court. In the majority opinion written by Justice Fortas states, “conduct by the student, in class or out of it, which for any reason—whether it stems from time, place, or type of behavior—materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech” (Tedford and Herbeck, 2005).
According to the Tinker decision, Yoder should be allowed to return to school and graduate in August. Yoder’s MySpace blog posed no disruptions to the classroom environment. In addition, the blog posts were a form of political expression conducted in a non-disruptive manner according to time, place, and manner restrictions and should therefore be protected by the First Amendment.
Lacking many traditional barriers, the Internet has rapidly become a medium for a wide range of expression. Unlike traditional media outlets, the Internet has no gatekeepers. Because of this, it has become a forum for political speech and individual expression. In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress included a provision known as the Communication Decency Act (CDA). The CDA contained two provisions that were aimed at protecting minors from “indecent” and “patently offensive” communications on the Internet. Several plaintiffs, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the CDA. In 1996, a special three-judge court panel unanimously declared the CDA unconstitutional (ACLU v. Reno, 929 F.Supp. 824 (E.D. Pa. 1996)). They argued that the law was inherently vague because “indecent” was not defined in the law and it prohibited speech that was legal for adults. The government then appealed to the Supreme Court, which held that the CDA was unconstitutional. This was the Supreme Court’s first decision on free speech in cyberspace.
The Supreme Court held that the CDA did indeed violate the First Amendment. Furthermore, they held that Internet speech was entitled to the highest degree of First Amendment protection. Due to the Supreme Court’s decision in Reno v. ACLU, it would be argued that Yoder’s MySpace blog does indeed enjoy First Amendment protection because speech found on the Internet is constitutionally protected. This is further compounded by the fact that political speech is constitutionally protected as long as it does not violate time, place and manner restrictions as annunciated in Hague v. CIO (1939), Schneider v. State (1939), Cox v. New Hampshire (1941) and Jamison v. Texas (1943). Yoder’s MySpace blog was created privately as a tool to release stress and it did not disrupt the education environment.
In United States v. Baker, 890 F.Supp. 1375 (E.D. Mich. 1995), a student at the University of Michigan posted a graphic narrative on a website which described the torture, rape and murder of a woman. In another story, the victim had the same name as one of the student’s classmates. A grand jury indicted the student for violating a statute that prohibited interstate communication of threats to injure or kidnap an individual. Baker’s attorney argued that the threats were not “true threats” and were therefore protected expression. Federal district judge Avern Cohn argued, “statements expressing musings, considerations of what it would be like to kidnap or injure someone, however unsavory, are not constitutionally actionable… absent some expression of an intent to commit the injury or kidnapping” (Tedford, 2005).
Based on the Baker decision, Yoder should be allowed to resume classes at the University of Louisville. The University of Louisville administration cited the gun-related postings as a reason for her dismissal. Yoder was merely expressing her opinions regarding gun-rights and posed no true threat to university administrators, teachers or students. Therefore, Yoder’s should be reinstated to the university’s nursing program.
Beat Articles
"ASWSU Senate passes tuition cap proposal"
By Staff Reports
The Daily Evergreen
"WSU halts incoming freshman applications"
By Andy Jones
The Daily Evergreen
By Staff Reports
The Daily Evergreen
"WSU halts incoming freshman applications"
By Andy Jones
The Daily Evergreen
Public Request Record Denial
Dear Ms. Sanford:
This letter is to acknowledge receipt of your Public Records Request 09-095 received on March 30, 2009, and respond to your request. You are seeking the following records:
1. Budget scenarios provided to the Budget Committee at the end of January; 2. Budget proposals from the College of Communications, College of Liberal Arts, College of Business, Office of the Provost, Office of the President, and University Relations; and 3. Any reports documenting trends or summaries in regards to the above proposals.
Your request must be denied. We are withholding the records you requested from production in accordance with RCW 42.56.280, which provides that preliminary drafts, notes, recommendations, and intra-agency memorandums in which opinions are expressed or policies formulated or recommended, etc. are exempt from disclosure until publicly cited by an agency in connection with any agency action.
This concludes the University's response to your request for public records.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact Linda Nelson at 509-335-3928.
Very truly,
Linda Nelson for
Ralph Jenks
Public Records Officer
Linda Nelson
Public Records Coordinator
Office of Procedures, Records, and Forms
P.O. Box 641225
Pullman, WA 99164-1225
509 335 3928
FAX 509 335 3969
nelsonl@wsu.edu
This letter is to acknowledge receipt of your Public Records Request 09-095 received on March 30, 2009, and respond to your request. You are seeking the following records:
1. Budget scenarios provided to the Budget Committee at the end of January; 2. Budget proposals from the College of Communications, College of Liberal Arts, College of Business, Office of the Provost, Office of the President, and University Relations; and 3. Any reports documenting trends or summaries in regards to the above proposals.
Your request must be denied. We are withholding the records you requested from production in accordance with RCW 42.56.280, which provides that preliminary drafts, notes, recommendations, and intra-agency memorandums in which opinions are expressed or policies formulated or recommended, etc. are exempt from disclosure until publicly cited by an agency in connection with any agency action.
This concludes the University's response to your request for public records.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact Linda Nelson at 509-335-3928.
Very truly,
Linda Nelson for
Ralph Jenks
Public Records Officer
Linda Nelson
Public Records Coordinator
Office of Procedures, Records, and Forms
P.O. Box 641225
Pullman, WA 99164-1225
509 335 3928
FAX 509 335 3969
nelsonl@wsu.edu
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Document-Based Story Proposal
I originally requested the 12 percent and 18 percent budget scenarios requested by the Budget Committee at Washington State University at the end of January. The request was denied based on RCW 42.56.280, which provides that preliminary drafts, notes, recommendations, and intra-agency memorandums in which opinions are expressed or policies formulated or recommended, etc. are exempt from disclosure until publicly cited by an agency in connection with any agency action.
As a result, I contacted several people associated with Student Press Law Center to find out if this was legal. In my search, it is infact legal for Washington State University to withhold these documents.
Therefore, I intend to write a story about the budget process and why these documents should be made public to ensure public oversight and input. This process is importance since the public are indeed owners of the education system and therefore have a right to take part in the budget-making process.
Washington State University's refusal to release these documents goes against its policy of 'transparency'. I wish to further explore why these documents were not released, what their importance would be to the public-policy process and the reactions of SPLC members and students.
----
Sources:
Mike Hiestand
SPLC Legal Consultant
Lisa Waananen
SPLC Intern
Linda Nelson
Public Records Coordinator
As a result, I contacted several people associated with Student Press Law Center to find out if this was legal. In my search, it is infact legal for Washington State University to withhold these documents.
Therefore, I intend to write a story about the budget process and why these documents should be made public to ensure public oversight and input. This process is importance since the public are indeed owners of the education system and therefore have a right to take part in the budget-making process.
Washington State University's refusal to release these documents goes against its policy of 'transparency'. I wish to further explore why these documents were not released, what their importance would be to the public-policy process and the reactions of SPLC members and students.
----
Sources:
Mike Hiestand
SPLC Legal Consultant
Lisa Waananen
SPLC Intern
Linda Nelson
Public Records Coordinator
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Beat Articles
"Bailout only benefits banks"
By Gavin Mathis
The Daily Evergreen
"Tuition, fees, books could jump to $10,000"
By Andrew Garber and Nick Perry
The Seattle Times
By Gavin Mathis
The Daily Evergreen
"Tuition, fees, books could jump to $10,000"
By Andrew Garber and Nick Perry
The Seattle Times
Helen Thomas and Bob Schieffer: A Symposium to Remember
Helen Thomas and Bob Schieffer—recipients of the 2009 Edward R. Murrow Lifetime Achievement Award—offered advice for current and aspiring journalists during their keynote speeches at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday at Beasley Coliseum.
Erica Austin, dean of The Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University said, “Helen Thomas and Bob Schieffer are two veteran political journalists who represent the best of the Murrow legacy: exceptional achievement in communication and a responsible, ethical, productive career.”
“Uncompromising ethics and quality,” said WSU President Elson S. Floyd. “This year’s recipients epitomize this standard. Because of their intellect and commitment, we are better as a country.”
Thomas and Schieffer both began the evening by praising the Murrow Legacy. “My favorite Murrow quote is, ‘We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,’” said Thomas. Schieffer said it was an honor to even be mentioned in the same book as Murrow, let alone be given an award with his name on it.
The disappearance of newspapers, the integrity of those acting as journalists, the importance of news in a democratic society and the effects of new communication technologies on journalism were addressed by this year’s keynote speakers. Thomas said, “I mourn the loss of real journalism.”
For 57 years, Thomas served as the White House correspondent for United Press International (UPI). During that time, Thomas has covered every president since John F. Kennedy. She recently left UPI to become a syndicated columnist with Hearst Newspapers.
“Helen never forgot how to deal with the powerful,” said Bob Schieffer. “Never let them scare you and remind them that they are always accountable to the people that put them there; the voters.”
In her keynote address, Thomas credited Murrow with her career in journalism and her approach to covering politics in Washington. “Murrow taught us to not be afraid to challenge the powers that be,” said Thomas. “I do not see that kind of courage in today’s journalists.”
Thomas charged modern journalists with being apathetic in today’s coverage of politics. Today’s journalists are “easily intimidated by the extreme right,” said Thomas. She concluded that journalists have failed Americans post-September 11th because they have failed to seek the truth, wherever it leads, said Thomas.
Given the title of “nicest man in Washington” by co-recipient Helen Thomas, Schieffer has been a reporter for 52 years. In 1969, he began working for CBS News. Since 1973, he has been a principle anchor. Schieffer has covered every presidential campaign and been a floor reporter at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and the Republican National Convention (RNC) since 1972. Schieffer also moderated the final presidential debates in 2004 and 2008.
Schieffer argued that new communication technologies have greatly effected how news is delivered. “Our profession is in a crisis and newspapers are in danger,” warned Schieffer. He argued that newspapers enlarge an individual’s experience and understanding of the world. “When we read a newspaper, we find two or three stories we weren’t looking for,” said Schieffer.
He urged audience members to recognize the change that is occurring in journalism due to new communication technologies. Though hardly a day passes without the news of yet another newspaper closing its doors, trained journalists are still needed, said Schieffer. “We need them now more than ever.”
Schieffer ended the evening with this piece of advice, “We must always adhere to the standards that Edward R. Murrow created in order for journalism to survive.”
----
Elson S. Floyd
Washington State University President
(509) 335-6666
Erica Austin
Dean of the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication
(509) 335-8840
----
1. The traditional media industry appears to be failing; the closure of many newspapers echoes this trend. What would you say to an aspiring journalists who are afraid that a career in journalism would not be available for them?
2. With new media quickly emerging due to the growing importance of the Internet, what do you envision the future of journalism to look like?
3. What was your most memorable interview? What made it so memorable?
Erica Austin, dean of The Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at Washington State University said, “Helen Thomas and Bob Schieffer are two veteran political journalists who represent the best of the Murrow legacy: exceptional achievement in communication and a responsible, ethical, productive career.”
“Uncompromising ethics and quality,” said WSU President Elson S. Floyd. “This year’s recipients epitomize this standard. Because of their intellect and commitment, we are better as a country.”
Thomas and Schieffer both began the evening by praising the Murrow Legacy. “My favorite Murrow quote is, ‘We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,’” said Thomas. Schieffer said it was an honor to even be mentioned in the same book as Murrow, let alone be given an award with his name on it.
The disappearance of newspapers, the integrity of those acting as journalists, the importance of news in a democratic society and the effects of new communication technologies on journalism were addressed by this year’s keynote speakers. Thomas said, “I mourn the loss of real journalism.”
For 57 years, Thomas served as the White House correspondent for United Press International (UPI). During that time, Thomas has covered every president since John F. Kennedy. She recently left UPI to become a syndicated columnist with Hearst Newspapers.
“Helen never forgot how to deal with the powerful,” said Bob Schieffer. “Never let them scare you and remind them that they are always accountable to the people that put them there; the voters.”
In her keynote address, Thomas credited Murrow with her career in journalism and her approach to covering politics in Washington. “Murrow taught us to not be afraid to challenge the powers that be,” said Thomas. “I do not see that kind of courage in today’s journalists.”
Thomas charged modern journalists with being apathetic in today’s coverage of politics. Today’s journalists are “easily intimidated by the extreme right,” said Thomas. She concluded that journalists have failed Americans post-September 11th because they have failed to seek the truth, wherever it leads, said Thomas.
Given the title of “nicest man in Washington” by co-recipient Helen Thomas, Schieffer has been a reporter for 52 years. In 1969, he began working for CBS News. Since 1973, he has been a principle anchor. Schieffer has covered every presidential campaign and been a floor reporter at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and the Republican National Convention (RNC) since 1972. Schieffer also moderated the final presidential debates in 2004 and 2008.
Schieffer argued that new communication technologies have greatly effected how news is delivered. “Our profession is in a crisis and newspapers are in danger,” warned Schieffer. He argued that newspapers enlarge an individual’s experience and understanding of the world. “When we read a newspaper, we find two or three stories we weren’t looking for,” said Schieffer.
He urged audience members to recognize the change that is occurring in journalism due to new communication technologies. Though hardly a day passes without the news of yet another newspaper closing its doors, trained journalists are still needed, said Schieffer. “We need them now more than ever.”
Schieffer ended the evening with this piece of advice, “We must always adhere to the standards that Edward R. Murrow created in order for journalism to survive.”
----
Elson S. Floyd
Washington State University President
(509) 335-6666
Erica Austin
Dean of the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication
(509) 335-8840
----
1. The traditional media industry appears to be failing; the closure of many newspapers echoes this trend. What would you say to an aspiring journalists who are afraid that a career in journalism would not be available for them?
2. With new media quickly emerging due to the growing importance of the Internet, what do you envision the future of journalism to look like?
3. What was your most memorable interview? What made it so memorable?
Background Information: Helen Thomas and Bob Schieffer
Often refered to as the "First Lady of the Press", Helen Thomas has served as a White House Correspondent for United Press Internation (UPI) for 57 years. She has covered every president since John F. Kennedy and has ended each interview session with "Thank you, Mr. President" until the Bush administration. Thomas is known for asking the hard-hitting questions in her pursuit of the truth. She has written four books and is a best-selling author. Thomas recently left UPI and went to work at Hearst Newspapers as a syndicated columnist.
Bob Schieffer has been a reporter for 52 years. He has been with CBS News since 1969 and acted as a principle anchor since 1973. Schieffer is one of the few journalists to cover every beat in Washington, D.C. -- the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department and Capitol Hill. Schieffer has covered every presidential campaign and been a floor reporter at the Democratic and Republican National Conventions since 1972. In 2004 and 2008, Schieffer moderated the final presidential debate.
Bob Schieffer has been a reporter for 52 years. He has been with CBS News since 1969 and acted as a principle anchor since 1973. Schieffer is one of the few journalists to cover every beat in Washington, D.C. -- the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department and Capitol Hill. Schieffer has covered every presidential campaign and been a floor reporter at the Democratic and Republican National Conventions since 1972. In 2004 and 2008, Schieffer moderated the final presidential debate.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Beat Articles
"Tuition surcharge will hit where it hurts"
From Staff Reports
The Daily Evergreen
"Potential budget cuts loom over university"
From Staff Reports
The Daily Evergreen
"WSU may see massive cuts"
By Jimmy Blue
The Daily Evergreen
From Staff Reports
The Daily Evergreen
"Potential budget cuts loom over university"
From Staff Reports
The Daily Evergreen
"WSU may see massive cuts"
By Jimmy Blue
The Daily Evergreen
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)