From:        Zen, databank@mindspring.com

Okay, you lot!  Look sharp and PAY ATTENTION.

See what can happen when some poor bastard asks for C&C and actually GETS IT?
^_^

RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY! ^_^


When I read your suggestions -- which came in in the same mail session as 
mine went *out* in -- I was wondering how you'd react to mine. :)

Because of this, it's still reasonable to conclude that Ranma's
responsible, if you don't know the full circumstances. And there are ways
of keeping Noriko from knowing the circumstances *and* still have her
behave journalisticly.

This is true... But Zen still thinks that the POINT of the story is that
she DOESN'T behave journalisticly.  Journalistically.  Bugger.  Like a
reporter ought to.  It can *start* with a genuine lack of information, but
Noriko's going over teh edge to *justify* her printing inadequately
researched material is what is really going to provide your dramatic
tension.

I'm not really disputing this. :) My basic problems are that she goes too 
far over the edge too fast, and doesn't even acknowledge the journalistic 
credo. As far as I could tell from your post, we both think some 
acknowledgement of journalistic standards needs to be done before it all 
comes crashing down on her; the difference is you apparently think this 
would be better done by confrontations with other student journalists, 
while I think she'd be a stronger character if she had these debates 
internally. (Battle with temptation to print damaging information without 
adequate support, losing to her inner demons, then paying the 
consequences.) 

For example, I seriously doubt Ranma would be
willing to explain his side of the story right off the bat, given how
touchy he is -- especially if the interview is started in a
confrontational tone, which all of the student journalists are
inexperienced enough to do. You could even add a little jounalistic depth
by having the student realize the mistake -- asks challenging question,
Ranma reacts badly, student realizes goof too late.

Any of this would make a good start, but it is not enough by itself.

You realize, don't you, that you have a NOVEL started here! ^_^

Er... well, I *did* say Raphael didn't need to get that deeply into it. 
:) Just a few sentences of dialog would be enough: "Did you check into 
these incidents" "Well, yes, but..." "But?" "No one would comment. Except 
for that nutcase Kuno."

Ranma's friends would
likely follow his lead, his weak enemies are going to be too scared to
say anything, and his strong enemies are not going to be considered
credible sources. Could you imagine a reporter accepting Kuno's standard
views on Ranma? Or one of Ryoga's rants?

D'oh!  Is that a SERIOUS question?  

Well, at least slightly rhetorical. :)

Hell Yes, Zen can imagine it!  Any
reporter with an axe to grind could print one of those rants verbatim, and
still come out smelling like a rose when (if) it blew up...  And don't kid
yourself.  Journalistic Integrity is all very fine and well, but it doesn't
mean what it did when Lou Grant was Editor!  Most Journalists DO try to
uphold it, but the bad apples out there can do a LOT of damage.  (Just like
bad cops, ne?)

True... I guess that since there are so many stereotypically bad 
impressions held about the media, I don't want to see stories 
contributing to them... especially when they don't fit the actual 
experiences I've seen. :) Any of the reporters I worked with on the UDK 
would listen to one of Kuno's typical rants (like the one following the 
'body and soul' speech) and immediately say "What a fruitcake"... 
followed by either "This guy is nowhere close to a reliable source" or 
"This'll be good for a laugh."

Given this, Noriko can go through these basic checks and still conclude
that it's Ranma's fault; in fact, if just about everyone gives 'no
comment' answers to her questions, it should make a good journalist
suspicious that there's *something* going on here -- but without anyone
going on the record, there's no proof and no grounds to publish anything.
Thus, bitterness and resentment, and a motive to continue pushing,
*without* the unthinking blind fury that seemed out of character for a
journalist. Instead of seeing the events and automatically assuming the
worst, she sees the events, checks them out, comes up empty, and then
gets suspicious and starts drawing conclusions.

If this were college, Hai.  But it is high school, so Zen thinks that
expecting Noriko to maintain these standards in the face of such adversity
is unrealistic.  Mind you, that does NOT mean impossible, Zen has known
many high school students with impeccable integrity - in high school and
since!

But Noriko has already demonstrated a bias.  She has made up her mind, and
will ignore any evidence she gets that contra-indicates her interpretation
of the data.  Ranma is at fault.  Period.  End of Sentence.

Again, I'm not sure we differ in intentions so much as in degree. I think 
we both agree she's going to let her bias get the better of her 
integrity; I just have trouble accepting that someone as intelligent as 
she's portrayed would go down without some kind of struggle.

In short, I think your basic structure still works fine. The main
differences would be that instead of acting in a devil-may-care blind
fury, Noriko's making a good-faith effort to act in a journalistic
fashion, and coming up with the wrong conclusions because the right
people aren't talking. Her main failure would be in succumbing to
temptation and printing something without all the facts, instead of
printing in a blind fury without care for the facts.

Zen thinks that too much is being read into "blind fury" here.  Bottom line
is that Noriko is letting her emotions cloud her judgement.  Maybe a
little, maybe a lot.  It's that simple - the *results* are complex.  The
story has more punch when the REASONS for the code of Journalistic
Integrity are driven home with a little more force.  Whether from ignorance
or malice, or some combination of the two, Noriko is gonna learn just what
kind of damage an irresponsible news item can do.  It's an object lesson.

True, and I think that's the strength of the story. I'd just like to see 
it focus more on her inner demons -- It could be wrong, I'm afraid it's 
wrong, but I can't resist the temptation to do it anyway -- instead of 
her charging ahead without regard to the consequences.

difference is that a good journalist works to fight personal biases when
reporting the news, to rise above personal opinions and give an objective
presentation. The thing that bothered me about Noriko is that she didn't
at least make the attempt to do this, to try and get all the facts on the
story. If she makes the attempt and fails, then it's more reasonable to
let her biases have some influence -- especially since, as you note
below, she's young and inexperienced. And portraying this struggle can
add depth to the character, as I noted above.

<snip>

In deference to the Professor, Zen will say in defense of his position that
the editor of the paper at the high school that HE attended did indeed one
year act like Noriko is here.  The result was two students were expelled
unjustly, and the fertilizer impacted the old rotary impeller with
substantial kinetic potential.  So it *can* happen.  It wasn't that the
editor in question was entirely without ethics, he just didn't like one of
the people involved, and was far too ready to believe the negative things
that he heard.  Situation is starting to sound kind of familliar, ne? ^_^

Uh-huh. <wry, sad grin>

so BE WARNED.  ZEN's opinions on this issue are JUST as biased as the
Professor's here, if not MORE so!  ^_^  (Zen just felt that needed to be
said, in the spirit of Journalistic Integrity, after all.  It is a DAMNED
difficult matter to maintain objectivity all the time, and Zen has nothing
but the utmost respect for those reporters that manage to do it.)

Time to reveal more of my own biases. ^_^ I got in an argument with a 
friend of mine a few weeks back about the old 'liberal bias' charge -- 
and aside from the fact that the stories weren't being reported to fit 
*his* opinion, the only evidence he could offer was that a certain 
percentage of reporters voted Democratic. I pointed out, first gently and 
then with increasing force, that it shouldn't make a difference how they 
voted -- that it's a reporter's *duty* to report the facts objectively, 
and that a good reporter keeps his opinions out of his work. He tried to 
claim that this was impossible; I pointed out that this was no different 
than any other professionals (administrators, lawyers, doctors -- the 
list goes on) who have to keep their personal opinions out of their work. 
It's left me a little touchy on the subject; journalists are getting a 
bum rap.

Well, Raphael?  How fast can you write, ne?  The members of the list are
probably getting tired of listening to Zen & the Professor, 

Oops. <sheepish look>

and would like to hear the writer's side of it! ^_^

Yes. :) I think I saw a post a little further down the line...



Travis Butler
(The Professor, formerly of Myth and Magick!, Lawrence, KS;
 tbutler@tfs.net, now from the Wandering Powerbook;
 <http://www.tfs.net/personal/tbutler/>;
 Mac page <http://www.tfs.net/business/tbutler/>)

...Cats are the proof of a higher purpose to the universe.