A bit late in the day, the Marshall Independent tells Norm Coleman to give up his election-contest appeal. That returns us to a tie (9-9) in the Quit vs. Continue battle among state dailies.
The Independent notes that it’s telling Coleman to go even though the paper endorsed him last fall. They’re not alone: at least four pro-Coleman papers have switched (Marshall, Worthington, Albert Lea and Bemidji).
Here’s the updated tote board:
Quit now, Norm (9)
♦ St. Cloud Times
♦ Worthington Daily Globe
♦ Albert Lea Tribune
♦ Winona Daily News
♦ Faribault Daily News
♦ Owatonna People’s Press
♦ Bemidji Pioneer
♦ Marshall Independent
♦ Minnesota Daily
Stay the course for now, Norm (9)
♦ Star Tribune
♦ Pioneer Press
♦ Duluth News-Tribune
♦ Rochester Post-Bulletin (second item)
♦ Mankato Free Press
♦ West Central Tribune
♦ Crookston Daily Times (with plenty of snark)
♦ New Ulm Journal
♦ Mesabi Daily News (Virginia, Mn.)
Lamely wishy-washy (2)
♦ Fargo-Moorhead Forum
♦ Grand Forks Herald
Unheard-from or unfound (8)
♦ Fairmont Sentinel
♦ Red Wing Republican-Eagle
♦ Morris Sun-Tribune
♦ International Falls Daily Journal
♦ Austin Daily Herald
♦ Brainerd Daily Dispatch
♦ Fergus Falls Daily Journal
♦ Hibbing Daily Tribune
Maybe this is journalism 101, but not having taken the class, why do newspapers have these editorials? I understand the editorial section and keeping opinion separate from news. I don’t get these editorials that supposedly speak for the newspapers when they just speak for an editorial board, and the boards surely can’t be unanimous. Why not just have separate editorials with individual names attached? Maybe that’s why I’ve never been impressed with what newspaper editorial boards thought. I treat like a column by someone who won’t be named.
I agree, Eric. This ongoing list of what the state’s papers say in their editorials is just another attempt at saying “The Old Media still matters!”
I’ve wondered why the Minnesota Daily is included in this list. Why not all of the other college newspapers in the state?
And to Eric’s point about editorial boards: When I worked on a college newspaper eons ago, I was on the editorial board, and we had to decide who we were going to endorse for the governor of Michigan in 1982. Half of the board wanted the Republican and half wanted the Democrat. In that situation, the paper’s bylaws called for the Editor-in-Chief to make the endorsement … and he picked the third-party candidate!
I don’t know if that says more about the editorial board process or more about the immaturity of college students. Probably both.
Gents – to answer your questions.
The “old media” may be in decline but I don’t they’ve stopped mattering, especially in the state’s smaller cities. (Candidates sure love ’em at election time anyway!)
This running feature is meant just as another datapoint, nicely balanced from around the state, from professionals who are supposed to ponder these things. Again, not be-all, end-all, but interesting and longitudinal.
I include the Daily because unlike other college papers, it has a large circulation and professional, paid staff (though still students). The editor makes more than he will in his first post-college job!
I’m not asserting “old media” doesn’t still matter. I think it’s vital actually. I still have a newspaper on my porch each morning and a radio in every room (I might try this TV thing all the kids are talking about). I’m just finally asking a question I’ve had since well before the Web. The editorials matter, but why do they put out something from a committee and unsigned instead of just having board members write their separate and by-lined opinions?
I cannot believe people think the Strib is left-wing. From what I am reading, they have become right-wing.
Where is this support of Norm Coleman coming from?