During yet another night of enjoying myself at the fine establishments Vermillion has to offer, a few people approached me with dissent to some of my news articles. Apparently many of Vermillion’s residents think Joe Sneve is another liberal media tool.

I’m going to set the record straight. I write news stories. I present facts, and only facts, to the readers. If someone doesn’t necessarily like the “facts,” thats OK, but please do not accuse me of misrepresenting them.

Of course, mistakes arise from time to time for journalists; however, this is not unlike any other profession in the world.

I obviously have opinions, some very strong, about certain issues. Every journalist does. Enabling people to be journalists is a fiber in our mental make-up that allows us to put aside our opinions and beliefs and just tell the story. From there, letting the reader apply what they’ve just learned any way they see fit. That is journalism!

Is the media pushing an agenda?

Mainstream and not-so-mainstream media outlets are often accused of being “liberal.” This is not a fair accusation in most cases. Sure there are exceptions. It doesn’t take a political science major to know where MSNBC and FOX News stand on many issues, but for most other news sources it’s not so simple.

The world we live in is, by its very nature, becoming more liberal. It’s evident in the crap we see on television and the Internet. Cultures are mixing and diversifying faster than ever, and it’s all we can do to try to keep up. The injustices in the United States and the world are being erased. Erased can mean change and change is not conservative. The news media, if it’s doing a good job, has no choice but to cover these “liberal” changes in society.

That’s where I see this misconception of a “liberal media” beginning.

What do you think?

When interviewing freshman to get their take on what it means for the university and the class itself to have zero freshmen representation in the Student Government Association for my story that ran in this week’s print issue, I was amazed to find out very few students actually knew the group existed, let alone what SGA’s main function is.

In the interview process, I asked students if they knew what SGA was. None of the 11 freshmen interviewed were familiar enough with SGA to recognize the acronym, except for Christena Georgas, who was offered a senate seat but declined due to a conflict of interest. Well more than three quarters of the freshmen were not aware USD had student government that actually dealt with significant issues.

Georgas said students fresh out of high school perceive collegiate student government to be as uninteresting as student government was at the institutions they just left.

But I’m not sure Georgas is entirely correct. She is right in that the majority of students I spoke with expressed absolutely no interest in the topic at all, but it goes beyond mere interest. They didn’t seem to think that student government was vital to the makeup of the university. Many appeared bewildered that a lack of freshmen representation in SGA was even news worthy. It just wasn’t important. If my analysis of the interviewees is even close, then let me just say this: If this is as civic-minded as these students are going to get, then we are in big trouble.

SGA needs freshmen representation in part to bring fresh ideas to the table but also there are certain issues that relate mainly to freshmen. SGA President Blake Alberts has told me more than a few times the dorm decoration ban would not have remained intact as long as it did if any of the senators or SGA administration had been aware of it. And because hardly any freshmen knew what SGA was, not one of the disgruntled students, and there were many, thought of bringing concerns to their senators.

Alberts has said he hopes to avoid occurrences such as this one and is hopeful SGA will have freshmen senators in the spring. Many freshmen aren’t sure how much they can handle when they first get to college, Alberts said.

If Mr. Alberts hopes to come through on his claimed ambitions, he is going to have to recruit like the SGA has never seen before and I hope he does.

Good luck!!!

Let me start this long overdue blog post by expressing my gratitude to those who encouraged me to get back on the horse; but I never really fell off the beast that is blogging, just gracefully hoisted myself off and away from it.

While attempting to resurrect my blog, I hope to tap into some newly acquired knowledge obtained at student government meetings and through interviews I’ve conducted for Volante stories. Local, state and federal legislation is still fair game as well.

Posts should be coming steady from here on out and I look forward to giving you some fat to chew on soon.

Cheers

Thursday night Senator Tim Johnson had a Get Out the Vote rally in Vermillion. After the event I sat down with the Senator to discuss his campaign and issues surrounding it. You can view the interview in two parts at The Volante’s webpage, VolanteOnline.com.

All who watched the debate between Ben Nesselhuf and Jerad Higman noticed the candidates agreed with each other on many issues. As I was browsing through some of the District 17 Senate candidate’s brochures and I noticed they not only agree on issues, but the little things about campaigning as well.

On the back of Nesselhuf’s flyer, which emphasizes education, there is a picture of school children raising their hands in eagerness to participate in class. Higman has a flyer also touting education. On the back of his flyer, there are series of photos with school children. What I found to be a bit funny is Higman used the same photo as Nesselhuf, or vice versa, however you want to look at it. Apparently, the photo is so powerful, neither candidate could afford to go without it.  

One could assume the ad agencies used have a pool of photos to pick from and the similarity was peer chance. Also, I’m pretty sure neither candidate is aware of this. None the less, it makes me wonder how often in other political races this type of parody occurs.   

I know this revelation won’t stop the presses, but I thought I’d share it with you.   

Wednesday night, Oct. 29, at 7:00p Central Standard Time, Barack Obama aired a 30-minute television advertisement on CBS, NBC, FOX, BET, MSNBC and TV One and Univision; an attempt to give viewers some insight to who he is, where he comes from and what he is all about . The move is unprecedented in modern elections. Media expert Tracy Evans said the ad cost the Democratic nominee’s campaign at least 3.5 million dollars. She also said the daunting ad is evidence “that the Obama campaign has more money than there is ad time left to buy.”

It’s been no secret the Democrats have more disposable money in this election than the Republicans do. It’s also no secret that it takes money, and lots of it, to win elections. It can easily be argued that John Kerry could have, and would have, beaten President Bush in 2004 if he just had the money to combat 527’s and other negative ad campaigns, such as the swift boat ads. With only six days until Election Day and trailing by a sizable margin in most polls, things all ready weren’t looking good for John McCain, but things got a lot worse as of 7:00p this evening.

John McCain cannot win this election when Barack Obama is spending huge chunks of money at will on advertising. McCain and the Republican Party just don’t have the resources to compete anymore. However, the conservatives have always been better with grassroots efforts. I suppose that could be their one ray of hope.

The US strike on Al Qaeda facilitators in Syria has prompted much discussion among many about whether President Bush is using our military to play politics.

Syrian Ambassador to the United States Imad Moustapha said the strike was unwarranted and was a terrorist attack. He also claimed the strikes were an attempt on President Bush’s part to gain political ground for his party in the upcoming elections.

Others have said the Syrian government hasn’t done enough to control their border to Iraq which is why the strike ultimately happened.

It’s plausible, but not likely, Bush would take advantage of a bad situation for political gain. However, the conversation is all for naught.

Pundits can say what they want about how the circumstance will affect the election, but this journalist says it won’t have an effect. Barack Obama will continue to insist his rival’s philosophies are Bush philosophies. All the while McCain will maintain his attempts to distance himself from the President. Active supporters of both candidates will be further emboldened, but undecided voters won’t be swayed by this sudden splash of foreign policy interest.

Above anything else, Americans are focused on the economy; and with only seven days until the election, and another down day on Wall Street Monday, both candidates will be telling people what they want to hear.

Thursday night I moderated the debate between Jerad Higman and Ben Nesselhuf. I spent a good chunk of time developing the questions for the first half of the 90 minute debate. When contemplating what to ask, I made sure not to pose any questions that could be perceived as bias. All of the questions, which you can view at the The Volante website, were neutral. It was my intention not to give either candidate any unfair advantage.

Overall, I thought the debate was a hit. Good questions and good responses all around, but there was one exception. I understand that being bipartisan is important, and I don’t blame either candidate for agreeing on more than one topic; however, a certain question prompted, in my opinion, a less than impressive answer by Jerad Higman.

The question was about public smoking bans. I expected the incumbent democrat Ben Nesselhuf to tout the anti-smoking propaganda that Americans have heard since what seems forever, which he did. What I didn’t expect was republican Jerad Higman to concede to the liberal ideology, whether it’s correct or not, that business owners shouldn’t be able to decide what they can or cannot do in their own establishments. Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought conservatives protected the interests of business owners and personal freedoms, whether they want to bring their kids to Applebee’s or not.

Ben Nesselhuf and Jared Higman, candidates for District 17 State Senate, debate at the Freedom Forum at the Al Neuharth Media Center. Follow the debate with our live blogger Patrick Morrison.

For live, streaming video of the debate, click here. Mac users will have to download Flip4Mac. Click here for a free download.

For a live blog with Assitant News Editor Patrick Morrison, click here.

The final debate last week between the two most famous people in America was a bit more interesting than the first two. Of course the post-debate buzz has been all about “Joe the plumber.” McCain alone mentioned the wealthy dude from Ohio over 20 times.

I agree with idea of allowing people to keep the money they work hard for; and the wealthy work just as hard as people in lower tax brackets. Despite my somewhat conservative viewpoint, I don’t understand why the majority of the debate was spent referencing a plumber in Ohio who makes $250,000 a year. Maybe I’m way off, but I didn’t know the average plumber made that kind of coin. I think I’m in the wrong business.

But seriously, my parents don’t make and have never made that much money in a fiscal year, but are well off by any reasonable standards. Anyone who makes as much as “Joe” does isn’t struggling. I feel McCain missed the mark by initiating “Joe’s” situation into the discussion to begin with. There is a time and a place for it, but not in October when you’re behind in the polls. McCain’s effort was wasted on the wrong audience.

Obama faltered in not calling his adversary on addressing the wrong constituents, but with a perceived sizable lead he was careful not to make any waves or doing anything to diminish it. Now that the debates are done and behind us, it’s in God’s hands, or the media’s.