The public deserves to know what goes on in our courtrooms just as much as it deserves to know what goes on in the legislative branches of government.
Newspapers have failed to find a way to get enough people to pay for their product.
There is a show business element to presidential politics that causes serious proposals and serious candidates to get lost.
I can’t imagine any other politician handling it that way.
The failures on election night are the result of a lack of coverage in the weeks and months leading up to it because of a fear that viewers will change the channel.
Leadership sometimes requires turning a blind eye to analytics.
It’s much more difficult to get a political message to register when there are hundreds of TV channels. Negative ads get noticed.
It was a Jim Acosta moment, but I didn’t feel threatened. Times are different now.
I was once amused by what I assume are Trump’s efforts to charge up his base and protect himself from negative coverage. I no longer find it amusing.
Not all anonymous sources share their information in sinister conversations in back hallways.
The candidates need to be asked tougher questions and then they need to be forced to answer them.
I’ve already seen the arguments about how journalists wouldn’t complain if the Sinclair message came from the left. Wrong.
I know guns are not the sole factor in the recent flurry of mass killings in America, but they are a factor.
The search is on for the next Barack Obama.
Lawmakers in safe districts, be they in Congress or in the Indiana General Assembly, don’t need to cooperate with others because they have no fear of losing the next election.
I thought it was a tribute to America that some of the players at a recent Colts game held on to the giant flag that covered the field at Lucas Oil Stadium while teammates nearby kneeled in protest.
Journalism has changed, the ways we consume it have changed, and the way people view journalism and journalists has changed, too.