Going into this week it was clear that the Arizona and Michigan primaries were going to be a close contest between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.  In the days leading up to the primaries Santorum made strong efforts to boost support in Michigan even attempting to convince Democrats to cast their vote against Romney.  Interestingly, Santorum’s efforts seemed to pay off as Romney only narrowly won his home state of Michigan.

These last couple days the Chicago Tribune had strong coverage of the primary results.  Where as in previous primaries there were only about six different stories offered by the Tribune, these past couple days there were many more stories before, during and after the primary votes were being cast.

Prior to the voting results, the stories focused on the opinions of the different candidates (mainly Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum).  There were a couple stories related to Santorum’s “robocalls” and how each of the candidates felt going into the primaries. There were stories related to the feelings of people on.  Two stories gave graphics about whether or not people were giving positive or negative feedback about the primaries on Twitter.

When Tuesday passed and Wednesday morning came story content began to shift to candidate response and how these primaries would affect the momentum leading up to Super Tuesday.

In relation to social media, the Chicago Tribune did very little tweeting about the event.  There were a couple of tweets that said Romney won and tweets providing links to the stories they had about the race but they also had quite a few tweets related to other things (such as the Midwest hurricanes).

Although the Tribune had strong coverage of the primaries it is obvious that its political focus is shifting to local elections.  The elections page now has a section entitled Illinois congressional races.  However, I think this has only made their political coverage stronger because it shows that the Tribune is able to balance national and local political coverage.

Recently I blogged about my disappointment in the Chicago Tribune's political page.  I reported on their lack of social media (asside from a link to the L.A. Times Twitter feed) and interactiveness as well as a low level of graphics. Today, I am happy to report that their page far exceeded my expectations.  

When I visited the site I expected to see the same format with a scroll of stories on the left and a slew of advertisements on the right.  However, this time things have changed.

To begin, the Tribune changed the title of their political page from "Politics" to "Elections."  This is not too significant but it was an interesting alteration.  More importantly, at the top of the page there is now a section entitled "Delegates to date."  This section provides simple information about the primaries.  It shows a picture of each of the four GOP candidates and the number of delegates they currently have.

The right side of the page has undergone massive change.  There are less advertisements and more hard news content. They have added a sections including a calendar of political events and sections for television videos, pictures and graphics related to political opinions.

Finally, as you scroll down to the very bottom of the page there is a "Political Video" section.  This section contains various clips of political speeches.

In my Journalism 4953 class on Feb. 16 Sharif Durham, director of social media at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, discussed the impact that social media can have on politics. 

It is no secret that the importance of social media has increased in recent years.  Everything from thoughts to breaking news can be posted immediately on social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook and in an instant they can become viral. 

In his presentation, Durham discussed the importance of upholding the principles and ethics of journalism while immersing in social media.  As a journalist, this idea really struck me.   The past few weeks I have become aware of the impact social media and blogging can have, but listening to Durham speak made me think of these things from an ethical standpoint.

Even though journalism today is immediate it does not mean that it has to be sloppy or error prone.  The beauty of journalistic writing is now being able to write something that is quick while being accurate and meaningful. 

Ultimately, anyone can write quick information, but that does not make him/her a journalist.  What distinguishes journalists from the average human is being mindful of the impact words can have. As journalists we need to be prepared for news at a moments notice but we also need to double-check our work to make sure that we are not being inaccurate or misleading.  

When I began this semester I knew very little about blogging. I’ve been required to do it for a couple of my classes but I never really understood the significance of it. In fact, from my perspective, blogging just seemed like a glorified platform for people to rant and get attention. Recently, my perspective on blogging has changed.

Now, I’ve learned from my Journalism 4953 class at Marquette University that blogging can have both positive and negative serious consequences.  It can be used as a way to get noticed by perspective employers or it can cause the blogger to get into trouble.  What distinguishes a good blog from a bad blog is how much time the individual takes to create the blog.  Taking time to create a thought out and quality blog will create a professional level of respect. 
 
The biggest thing I have had to learn and remember about blogging is that it will be read by other people professionally and privately. Even though I am not a widely known blogger, my blog could potentially be read all over the country or even worldwide. Therefore, I have a responsibility to myself and to the wider public to be accurate, truthful, and professional even if my blog is just for a class. 
 
I’m not sure if I will continue blogging after I complete my education but I am excited to learn more and see how I develop as a blogger. 

Republican attention was redirected this past week as Rick Santorum swept the Colorado, Missouri, and Minnesota primaries.  Until now, Mitt Romney appeared to be the presumptive nominee with Newt Gingrich following in second.  In fact, Santorum has received little to no media attention however, voters proved that it doesn’t matter who was previously favored because they control the future.

The concern presented by the Chicago Tribune in its article “Turnout low in latest round of GOP contests” was the lack of voters as compared with the 2008 primaries.  According to the article, “Turnout in Nevada’s caucuses last week was down 26% from 2008… turnout in Minnesota was down 23%.”  Looking at these significantly lower numbers poses somewhat of a concern for the Republican Party. 

The coverage of these primaries for the Chicago Tribune was rather typical.  There were a few stories about the primary results and a few other stories about the response to those results but the Tribune was quick to redirect its focus.  Being from President Obama’s home state the paper concerned itself with voter feelings about Obama in a story entitled “Poll: Obama Remains popular on home turf” the Tribune presented the feelings of the Illinois public in this upcoming election.

Overall, the Chicago Tribune coverage of the primaries seemed to be the same story different candidate.  There is no real excitement in the Chicago Tribune’s website and it once again lacks in photos and interactivity.  

The Chicago Tribune’s coverage of the Florida primary results on Tuesday was much more in depth than it had been during the Jan. 26 debate.  The Trib provided stories for its readers related to the effects of a Mitt Romney’s win on each of the candidates and what is to come for the GOP. 

One way the Chicago Tribune amped up its coverage was by explaining how Romney might have won the Florida primary and the future of the elections.  For example, in an ad “The Florida primary, by the numbers” the Chicago Tribune provided different figures related to the Florida primary.  For example, it spoke about how much money Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich spent on advertising and how many delegates were on the ballot.  This article provide information that was short, easy to understand, and informative. However, the one letdown of the Chicago Tribune is the lack of social media and interactiveness on the website.  Although readers are able to make comments to different stories through Facebook and Twitter, there was no live tweeting during the voting coverage.  In addition, there are very few pictures or supplemental video associated with each story.  Before clicking on the story it appears that there will be a picture with it but once the story is clicked on there is no picture.  In fact, the only significant social media is a Twitter feed that is linked to the L.A. Times

When comparing the Chicago Tribune’s social media and interactiveness with CBS News, there is a huge difference.  The politics page on the CBS News website has large pictures associated with each story.  Also, as you scroll down on the CBS homepage there are about six different videos related to the elections. 

In Journalism 4953 we discussed the amount of control debate moderators have.  We agreed that a strong moderator has the power to guide a debate in the direction that he/she desires however, a weak moderator will often fall prey to the attacks of the candidates. 

During the South Carolina Primary on Jan. 19 GOP candidate Newt Gingrich lashed out at CNN's moderator, John King. King began the debate by asking Gingrich to respond to his ex-wife's comment about the open relationship that she had with Gingrich.  Gingrich responded to this by saying "I am frankly astounded that CNN would take trash like that and use it to open a presidential debate." He then proceeded to put down the moderator and the media as a whole.  At this point, King revoked his question, apologized, and moved on to a different topic.  The end result was that this debate was much less structure and much of the power was placed in the hands of the candidates rather than the moderator.

The Florida Primary debate on Jan. 26 was much different.  In this debate the moderator was CNN's Wolf Blitzer.  During the debate Blitzer asked Gingrich is he was “satisfied with level of transparency of Romney’s personal finances?”  Gingrich again attempted to lash out calling the question “nonsense.”  However, unlike King in South Carolina, Blitzer did not back down from his question explaining that it was significant because Gingrich himself had attacked Romney about his foreign bank accounts that week.  Blitzer continued to pressure Gingrich saying, “If you make a serious accusation against Gov. Romney like that you need to explain that.”  Eventually, Gingrich relinquished and answered the question.

By pressuring the candidates and standing his ground Blitzer was able to take control of the debate.  He forced candidates to answer the questions and stopped them from wandering too far off topic and as a result, the Jan. 26 debate was much more interesting than the Jan. 19 debate. 

 

Prior to the State of the Union address Tuesday night much of the political coverage in the Chicago Tribune was related to the Florida primaries and the public response to Mitt Romney’s tax returns.  However, there were five stories devoted to the State of the Union address.  Two of the pre-State of the Union stories were related to how the speech is prepared and President Barack Obama’s plans for the future. They focused on Obama’s plans for tax reform and the policies that he plans to implement in his potential re-election.  The other three stories were about the feelings of the Republicans.

Seeing as this speech will likely spark Obama’s 2012 campaign the coverage following the speech was related to what Obama said and how the public responded. There were stories that spoke about what the Chicago Tribune felt were big points in the speech such as the Dream Act and tax reform.  During his speech Obama made a point to show that he believed tax reform was necessary in order to help the economy.  He also pointed out the fact that there are many people who have been living in the United States their whole lives that are not legal citizens.  Obama hopes that in the future these people will be able to gain citizenship and contribute to the economy.

In addition, there were stories that focused on the negative response from the Republican party. Naturally the Republicans had many critiques about what the President had to say.  Some felt that the president has not lived up to his promises.  Others such as Mitt Romney believed that he has changed his stance and taking the ideas of the Republican candidates.

By Wednesday morning most of the coverage about the State of the Union had ceased. Instead the focus shifted to Gabrielle Giffords resignation and the Thursday primaries.  The next step will be to see who the Republican candidate will be and how the president will campaign against him.

The result of the South Carolina GOP primaries came as a shock to many people.  Newt Gingrich won 40% of the Republican vote in South Carolina.  This means that three different Republican candidates have won three different primaries.  Rick Santorum won the Iowa primary, Mitt Romney won the New Hampshire primary, and now Gingrich won South Carolina.  With the withdrawal of Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry there are now only four candidates left (the fourth being Ron Paul). 

Going into the primaries Romney was expected to be a clear front-runner but as seen in the results of the debates this is not the case.  Romney was especially hurt in the South Carolina debate by the overwhelming demand for the release of his tax returns.  It is no secret that Romney is an extremely wealthy man.  He was born into a wealthy family and has worked his way up to accrue millions of dollars. Until now Romney has kept his tax returns private however, with all the pressure he faced in South Carolina he has been forced to make them public.

Most news sources are portraying this race as a Romney Gingrich duel and they are giving little attention to the other two candidates. However, according to CNN Ron Paul “tripled his South Carolina vote from 2008 and so claimed ‘victory’ of sorts.”  In addition, Santorum did win the Iowa primary although only by a small margin. 

Ultimately the goal of the Republican Party is to win the presidential election against President Barack Obama.  This means that the strongest Republican candidate will be the one to go on against Obama. If there is anything that these three primaries have shown is that it is anybody’s race and we should not discount any one of these four candidates.

In the beginning of this school year I knew very little about U.S. politics.  I had never followed the primaries or seen a full debate.  In fact by most standards I was completely uninformed.  I had done some preliminary research on a few candidates in the 2008 election but not enough to get a true sense of the candidates.

When I began to follow the 2012 primaries and began writing this blog my eyes were opened to a whole new world.  I have started learning about the personal and public lives of each of the candidates left in the election and I am beginning to understand how the political scene works.

This past week I followed the South Caroling primaries in the Chicago Tribune.  Much of the coverage was correlated with how Gingrich won South Carolina.  The Tribune stated, “the Gingrich victory followed disappointing finishes in the first contests in Iowa and New Hampshire.”  This approach is similar to that of CNN and msnbc.com.

However, the Chicago Tribune is different from other news sources I viewed in one way. Many of the Chicago Tribune stories related to the primaries are short and focus on comments made by the candidates.  For example, there is a short story about Mitt Romney advocating for self-deportation.  Anther story is about how Ron Paul intends to continue in the race.  These short blurbs are placed on the website often and do not delve too much into the outcome of the primaries but rather give a commentary on what was said during the debate.

I am anxious to continue following the primaries and the Chicago Tribune to see what the end result will be and how it will be covered.