Reviews for What Are Journalists For?

The average rating for What Are Journalists For? based on 2 reviews is 2 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2007-12-22 00:00:00 Ronald Miller It's an interesting examination of the idea that journalists need to better engage the public (and the potential pitfalls that entails), but ultimately, there's just wasn't enough there for a book. This would have been a fantastic read as a paper.

Review # 2 was written on 2014-05-14 00:00:00 Thomas Hedley This was a pretty good overview of the Commission on Presidential Debates and the history of presidential debates in the United States. Minow addresses some of the criticisms that the CPD has faced in recent years with regard to transparency and inclusion of third party candidates. However, he does not go far enough in establishing new and better rules for inclusion, stating that the existing rules are adequate. If the existing rules were adequate, then we would have seen greater third party participation. Instead, I would like to see the rules changed to include any candidate receiving more than 15% of the popular vote in a previous election, or whom 50% of those polled want to see included (the current rules) PLUS whatever third party candidate is leading in the polls. This measure would insure that the debates would always be three ways, and would always include a third party candidate. The debates could be a positive force for change in establishing a viable third party in the U.S.