“And once that became obvious, we said so, over and over again, all the time. We said it in public, we said it in private. We said it when newspapers hired us as designers, we said it when we were brought in as consultants, we said it for free. We were some tiresome motherfuckers with all our talk about the end of news on paper. And you know what? The people who made their living from printing the news listened, and then decided not to believe us.

So I’m calling bullshit on the Rosenbaum thesis, because no one has been “caught up in this great upheaval.” Caught up? That makes it sound like a tornado. This change has been more like seeing oncoming glaciers ten miles off, and then deciding not to move.”

“Not only do the reporters have little interaction with the candidates, but increasingly they are having little impact on the broad campaign narratives and daily story lines that supply most voters with their impressions of the candidates.

That’s more often taking place in cable studios or on Web sites far removed from the ceaseless grind of the press bubble — in which reporters schlump on and off the plane, in and out of buses and gymnasiums-turned-filing centers, several times a day, dozens of times a week.

… So reporters gripe among themselves, wondering why their news organizations pay tens of thousands of dollars to be shut out.

Officials of both campaigns said they had become exasperated with what they consider the petty controversies or insider minutia that is the obsession of the on-the-plane reporters, and didn’t want to take a chance of creating a story that would override the story they were trying to tell with their staged, scripted events.

… The campaigns’ thinking: They get their message out to local voters, and the questions are rarely hard-hitting. And the interviews are more likely to be about issues or local color, rather than the political conflict that consumes national reporters.

This spotty access is one of the key ways that bloggers and new-media outlets have undermined the ability of traditional organizations to set and drive the campaign narrative.”

I’m not sure that use of the word “undermined” is appropriate here with respect to the blogosphere, nor would it necessarily be a negative given the major failures of MSM to uncover the truth is such important instances as invading Iraq.

“The thing that stood out most to me in the study was the distinction young consumers make between wanting to be informed versus wanting to follow the news. Whereas I personally enjoy following the minutia of the campaign trail as much as a zealous NFL fan watches the stats, most of my peers prefer the highlight reel. A news outlet that can provide information about major milestones in quick context resonates most.“  Read more here.

Also of interest is a 2003 study Andrew and I did at Medill with the Media Management Center about reaching young-light news consumers in Milwaukee.

“The journalism-school side of my brain was inclined to agree with [the reader] because certainly one can defiine as, say, an A1 story about Iraq from the New York Times or a report on the recession from the Wall Street Journal. But I don’t believe it’s that simple anymore, or that new media enthusiasts are stretching the definition of news to show that the millennial generation is engaged, especially when amateurs are more frequently leading the traditional news cycle, as we saw this past weekend with blogosphere and Sarah Palin.” Read more here. 

Talk about audacious: To challenge a flawed system while dominating it, to oust one of the greatest Democratic establishment candidates ever, to introduce the democratizing concept of grassroots-netroots activism to the political process, to defeat racist stereotypes, to proclaim the arrival of the post-Boomer era, and to do it while staying (seemingly, at least) relatively committed to his core principles. To anyone who has been cynical about politics, this man has proved that a persistent citizen of ordinary means is capable of asserting himself in the power structure and that change (as much as I hate that vague word) is possible.

Plenty has been written deconstructing the policies he presented (loved the 10-year end of oil addiction), the atmosphere (once in a lifetime, cheesy fireworks), and the Clinton’s graciousness (they were team players). What I took from the week, and his speech in particular, was something I’ve been thinking about a lot recently: If we want to actualize the things we’re talking about, those of us who are invested in this candidacy and the set of ideas it represents must fully commit ourselves immediately to two things. GOTV (for you non-political junkies, this means “Get Out the Vote”) and Activism ‘09.

We still have two months and a tough general election to get through, and our foremost responsibility, particularly as young professionals, is to prove that our engagement is not hype by showing up at the polls on Nov. 4. Everything I’ve seen to this point indicates that this will happen, but I am committed to redoubling my efforts to make sure that all my pals are registered and working their own circles.

Beyond that, though, we have to be preparing each other for what happens after we win. 2009 is going to suck. There’s nothing sexy happening, like it was this year. Eli Manning may throw another Hail Mary to win the Super Bowl, but otherwise we’ve got no hot elections, no Olympics, etc. We’re just going to have a shitty economy, a war to end, continued high gas prices, and a lot of HOPE with no resolution. The reason the campaign has been successful is because so many people have personally invested, donating time, money, phone calls, door-walking. If we just check his name on the ballot box and go back to life as it was before, the movement will fail. I’ve been thinking about dedicating the energy I’ve given to Barack to at least a couple of the core issues I care about most after the election, and I’m trying to encourage my friends to do the same.

To give is worth it. This last year and a half has connected me with so many inspiring individuals, even in the sea of superficial starf&*#ers in Los Angeles. To have kicked off this year in Iowa, with people still telling me we were crazy to think we could do this, and to be all together in Denver this week celebrating a hard-fought victory is one of the most rewarding feelings I’ve ever had. I’m so proud of everyone’s hard work.

Check out the Flickr gallery >> for photos or read the Twitter feed for the play-by-play of my convention experience. We’ll break things down in more detail on Wilshire & Washington Wednesday, along with thoughts from Ted’s trip to the RNC in Minneapolis. We’ll also hear from my new favorite blogger, The Nation’s Ari Melber, if he’s not jet setting around on BO’s plane.

AND, if you’ve got the stomach to process news from the RNC, I highly recommend reading Media Lizzy’s coverage. For a conservative, she’s not half bad.

While a lot of the usual arguments were being made, Will.i.am stole the show (to much applause) by talking about passion and inspiration. Noting that stepping out politically as he has this year is “detrimental” to his career, he said “I’m willing to take that risk for my country” because he’s been so inspired by BO. He was also convinced that the web would enable more people to connect and communicate without the corporate revenue-driven model that predominates creativity and information. And for my E & P readers, he also argued that entertainment information is a viable source of news (which I’m not entirely convinced on; it really should be more of an entry point).

Since I’m jetting off to The Big Tent now, I’m going to bullet point some other things that stood out to me:

- Rahm Emanuel argued that the web is 2008’s equivalent to Bush’s tactic of mobilizing church groups in 2004. He also said the next step is how the example of BO’s candidacy will lead local politicians to implement new media strategies.
- Charlie Rose asked George Stephanopoulos why the Republicans haven’t embraced the internet (because they’re too busy gabbing on talk radio!!) and he said they didn’t have the right talent, like BO has Facebook’s Chris Hughes.
- SNL guy (sorry I can’t remember your name right now! I’ll look it up later!) said that he is most interested in seeing how comments evolve in 2012, which is one of the things I’m interested in too. They are such a great value in terms of interactivity and expanding the conversation, but they’re expensive to moderate and crowded with drivel.
- I also caught up with WaPost publisher Katharine Weymouth and talked about preserving reporting resources for newspaper brands in the new media realm and she really seemed to get it. She was realistic about the non-competitive nature of the web. She also said she thinks readers will enjoy vertical-driven information, where they can access the things they like most. We both expressed concern with that model, however, that readers would not benefit from the stumbled-upon factor of news they don’t seek out directly. I suggested that it may be made up for through social networking, since friend recommendations and sites like Digg serve as entry point to news you weren’t necessarily tuned into.
- And finally, I was pleased to see my former governor, Gray Davis, working the crowd. I wondered what happened to that guy! Call it a comeback?

I’ll be interviewing Digg’s marketing director on W&W at 4:30, and Digby joins us at 6pm for the regularly scheduled show. And now … off to search for disgruntled HRC supporters!!
UPDATE: My agent notes that SNL guy is Fred Armisen. Thx!!

“Defenders of the millennial generation’s civic engagement had some explaining to do last week after a recent Pew study indicated that a third of us don’t seek out any news on a typical day, including online media. As E&P reported when the data was released, this statistic undercuts a common argument that millennials are not turned off, they just get their news from non-traditional outlets beyond print and broadcast media.”

Read more here.

In this week’s Editor & Publisher column I discuss the murky intersection of journalism with activist bloggers and social networks. 

For better or worse, journalism is inherently fused with technological evolution and this alignment will have redefining implications for young journalists. Thanks to the emergence of new publishing platforms and online communities, professionals are now aligned with amateurs as full-fledged participants in The Social Contract 2.0. In this new contract, the traditional role of journalists as arbiters of ideas and facts will blur with the often agenda-driven activism of bloggers and social networks. … Read more here.

I’m more of a Mother Jones gal now, but I’m watching Tina Brown’s project with Barry Diller with keen interest. Gawker reported yesterday on how Liz Smith* leaked the news that the site will be called “The Daily Beast,” a reference to “Scoop” by Evelyn Waugh. I might have preferred something more “Fountainhead”-ish, as Gail Wynand would surely have been literature’s first publisher to embrace the task of filtering The Internets’ mob rule. But considering I’m still grumpy about the Poynter reporter who hates the name of my Editor & Publisher feature, I’m going to be open-minded to another person’s creative thought process. 

*Mandatory Liz Smith love here, as she is responsible for my favorite quote and life motto: “Begin somewhere. You can’t build a reputation on what you intend to do.” 

I did receive some messages from journalists (young and old!) who were enthusiastic about beginning an ongoing dialogue on the future of journalism. People who know me well can attest that I’ve been a crusader for delivering compelling news to the millennial generation since I was a 19-year-old opinion columnist in the Daily Bruin at UCLA. I then studied millennial media habits in graduate school at Northwestern University, and my first real job was as a general assignment reporter and columnist at RedEye, the Chicago Tribune’s special daily edition for 18- to 34-year-old readers.

There was some skepticism about whether -31- (and it’s esoteric reference to the deadwood edition; the mark “-30-” used to denote the end of a reporter’s story) will resonante with younger journalists. That will be entirely dependent upon who chooses to participate. I hope journalists of all varieties will choose to own a piece of the conversation and contribute.

If you have a story idea or comment, leave one here or email me.