Contact Whalen at 978-888-3131 or tjw64@comcast.net.

Twenty years at the Associated Press taught me that although getting it first was high on the list of journalistic accomplishments, getting it wrong was the absolute worst thing you could do. That sensible dogma has changed in the frenzied world of media saturation. The downside of this shift was again on display during the week of the Boston bombing coverage.

Mixed in with very commendable reporting was very, very bad journalism. There were two explosions. No there were three.  Additional bombs were found and dismantled. A Saudi national, a person of interest, was under armed guard in a hospital surrounded by SWAT teams. Two days later came the report that suspects had been identified, arrested and were on their way to court.  None of this breathless reporting was right.

Bad information was so endemic that we heard a reporter on one cable network explain that this was the new normal. “You rarely get it right the first time,” he said. While that explanation could be used as a new ironic slogan (CNN, we rarely get it right the first time) in counterpoint to Fox News’ Fair and Balanced, this half-hearted explanation/apology unfortunately seems to define the new rules of journalism.

How did we arrive at this unfortunate destination?

News has always been a competitive sport, but there was a certain lag time built into reporting developments. Newspapers had 12 to 24 hours before the next press time to double check their facts. Television networks and local channels had similar intervals. If they broke into commercial programming, it was because they had real news.  The wire services did report news as it happened, but the responsibility chastened those organizations. Getting it wrong meant you were leading the whole media and its audience astray.

Not anymore. Almost all media outlets have non-stop deadlines. Each one feels compelled to yell out things (true or unproved) all the louder to stand out against the ever increasing din. Worse still is the new layer of news aggregators who echo, amplify and mutate original reporting into a deafening chant that drowns out essential context and balance that is supposed to be the mission of journalism.

This compulsion to forsake accuracy for “scoops” was best illustrated by the constant coverage offered to a scared populace by Boston’s local television stations. Even if we assume best intentions were behind the blather and speculation that spewed out, minute by minute, for the past tortuous week, the resulting product was full of ego and missteps.  Continuous coverage means that 60 seconds of each minute must be filled with something. What the street reporters and the meat puppets back in the station mostly provided, however, was low in real information. As the minutes ticked away to hours, viewers had to sit through repetitious conversations among reporters guessing at what had happened and what was going to happen. If something did happen, it was endlessly repeated, as was the case of a recording of a gun battle between police and one of the fugitives, which was looped, so the burst of gunfire became a continuous fusillade that made an action movie soundtrack seem like a pastoral sunrise by comparison.

Certainly it is hard to fill every minute with something relevant. But it is easier if reporters know what they are covering. One example of this was the farce that took place outside Brigham and Women’s Hospital, where reporters constantly noted the presence of a SWAT team by the entrance.  One New York outlet had reported that a Saudi national was being held in custody as a person of interest so reporters gathered outside to speculate that security was there because the suspect was there. Had the reporters known their business, if they had covered the emergency drills that Boston authorities conduct, or studied the doctrine set out for first responders, they would have known that in any large scale emergency one of the first steps is to secure the hospitals. That bit of pre-crisis knowledge, or reporting that there was a security presence at the other hospitals, would have given the audience the needed context to process the information.

Bad reporting has lasting consequences. The first erroneous reports become part of the conspiracy theories that develop after an event. We can expect that those wrong details at the beginning of the story will become the bedrock of theories about a government false flag operation under the control of dark cabals. The erroneous reports of extra bombs, of other suspects and the rest of the conflicting information that spewed forth last week will only increase the cynicism of the citizenry. People won’t believe the true details that are buried in the rubble of misleading reports.

Contact Bayles at 617-353-7736 or fbayles@bu.edu.

“We found that warmer temperatures on the day of the race slow winning times such as occurred in last year’s hot weather when the winning men’s time was nine minutes slower than it had been in the cool-weather race of 2011,” said Primack.

Read about their study here or visit Prof. Primack’s blog for more information.

Contact Primack at (617) 353-2454 or primack@bu.edu.

International relations professor William Keylor recently spoke with WCVB-TV in Boston discussing what these actions by North Korea mean to the Korean Peninsula and the world. Keylor is the author of A World of Nations: The International Order Since 1945. Below are some of his comments:

On North Korea’s motive: “When you keep repeating that the American imperialists are about to attack us, then that will enforce cohesion within the country.”

How can it be stopped: “I really think that the key to this whole problem lies in Beijing. China is the only one with any kind of leverage over North Korea. So I am hopeful that the Chinese government will recognize that this is going to be a real challenge.”

Worst case scenario: “A miscalculation that could be catastrophic. The capital of South Korea is 30 miles from the demilitarized zone and if the North decided to attack, it would be, in a matter of seconds that South Korea would be devastated.”

Can N. Korea’s weapons reach mainland U.S.: “Every indication that I have is they don’t have that capability.”

View video of entire interview here.

Contact Keylor at 617-358-0197 or wrkeylor@bu.edu.

It is likely that the case that will come up the most in the two oral arguments is Romer v. Evans (1996), where the Supreme Court struck down Amendment 2, a ballot initiative that amended Colorado’s constitution to forbid any sort of anti-discrimination protection for homosexuals.  The campaign for Amendment 2 followed several cities adopting anti-discrimination laws protecting on the basis of sexual orientation.

First, Romer will be relevant as a comparison between Amendment 2 and the effect of Prop 8 –  whether Prop 8 is like or unlike Amendment 2, in singling out a particular group  (homosexuals/same-sex couples) and stripping away their constitutional right to marry, and between Amendment 2 and DOMA — whether DOMA unconstitutionally singles out one group of married couples (same-sex couples lawfully married under state law) and denies them federal recognition of their marriage.

Romer will also be relevant on whether the Court established a fourth level of judicial review – something between rational basis and heightened scrutiny.  BLAG (Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group) and the proponents of Prop 8 say no; opponents say yes.  The Court may be interested in the approach taken in the First Circuit and the lower court in Windsor: that Romer supports a more careful or searching review when a law subjects historically disadvantage minorities to discrepant treatment.

Supporters of DOMA and Prop 8 say deferential rational basis review is the appropriate standard.  Opponents argue either, at a minimum, for the Romer type intensified review or, preferably, for intermediate scrutiny because sexual orientation is a quasi-suspect classification.

In the Prop 8 case, it is also possible SCOTUS will focus primarily on federalism and question what interest or authority the federal government has in defining marriage when the definition of marriage historically is a matter of state law.

Contact McClain at 617-358-4635 or lmcclain@bu.edu.

In the study, children were given stickers to share with others. In one group, children ages 3 – 8 stated that they should share the stickers equally, asserted that others should as well, and predicted that others had shared equally with them. Nevertheless, children failed to engage in equal sharing until age 7 or 8. In another group, 7–8-year-olds correctly predicted that they would share equally, and 3–6-year-olds correctly predicted that they would favor themselves, ruling out a failure-of-willpower explanation for younger children’s behavior. The data suggest that, although 3-year-olds know the norm of equal sharing, the weight that children attach to this norm increases with age.

For more about the study, read The Boston Globe’s coverage.

Contact Blake at 617-358-6024 or pblake@bu.edu

Christopher Muller, a professor and former dean at Boston University’s School of Hospitality Administration, spoke with many media outlets on the difficulties facing the cruise line and its brand, as well as the impact on the cruise industry.

Cruisin’ takes a bruisin’ in eye of PR storm (USA Today): “The (Carnival) brand is in a terrible place … and (cruising) has now become perceived by many people as one of the most stressful vacation choices.”

Carnival lowers financial outlook after Triumph, ‘Fun Ship’ ship issues (Miami Herald): “How long does it take before customers say they’re not doing this anymore? I think you’re going to see it unraveling. This is death by 1,000 cuts. This is something that management can’t just say, ‘It’s OK and it’s rosy and everybody loves our cruise lines.’ ”

Cruise ship trouble (WCVB): “Repeat customers are the ones that really are your problem because once they stop being in the habit of using your cruise line, they won’t come back.”

Problems continue for Carnival Cruise (ABC News “World News with Diane Sawyer”): “To minimize the service, you maximize the revenue and you try to keep them moving as fast as possible back out to sea.”

More problems aboard Carnival Cruise ships (NPR “The Two-Way Blog”): “They are doing something wrong with preventative maintenance. Carnival has so many working ships that to say the fleet is in distress is maybe a little bit broad, but clearly something is not right.”

“Dream” voyage turns to nightmare (CNN): “This is a management problem. They are doing something wrong with preventive maintenance. Carnival has so many working ships that to say the fleet is in distress is maybe a little bit broad, but clearly something is not working right.”

Contact Muller at 617-353-8916 or cmuller@bu.edu.

Bill Clinton is known to have complained to Yasser Arafat that his failure to accept a U.S.-sponsored peace deal would relegate Clinton from a ‘near-great’ to an ‘average’ ranking in the pantheon of American presidents.  On this matter Clinton was right: the foreign relations part of his presidency was disappointing  — not disastrous but nothing to give tremors of concern to the likes of Andrew Jackson, James K. Polk, Teddy Roosevelt, or even Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan.

Now comes Barack Obama, through the voice of his new secretary of state, John Kerry, determined to raise no false hopes with regards to the Arab-Israeli dispute.  In fact, Kerry suggests that the kind of effort once directed toward the Arab-Israeli dispute will become more diffuse with such issues as a nuclear Iran, the grinding Syrian insurrection, and the search for the elusive ‘Arab Spring’ sharing Obama’s energy and attention.

But the recent history of the Middle East cautions against optimism that significant deals can be reached in one dispute while others are left to fester.  The Arab-Israeli conflict — shown to be negotiable in dozens of mock sessions and at least two real ones — impacts strongly on Iran’s apparent intention to develop nuclear weapons, the standing of the radical Hezbollah movement in Lebanon and its policy toward the Sunni-dominated  areas of Iraq which posed such great difficulty for the U.S. in the second Gulf War.

When one considers the records of those presidents who excelled in foreign policy versus those whom history will pass by, one sees among the former group a handful of attributes.  First, a clear vision of what he seeks to achieve.  Second, a clear appreciation of the stakes.  Third, an appreciation of the obstacles to be encountered and the costs of failure.  Fourth, the cost of doing nothing.  And fifth, the virtues of being judged un homme serieux.

As of now, Obama appears a man who has made little foreign policy effort and has little to show for it.

Contact Zelnick at 617-353-5007 or bzelnick@bu.edu.

Lawmakers rip into regulators over money-laundering prosecution (Washington Post): “The level of this money laundering and the fact it’s gone on for so long meant that regulators have been asleep.” Mark Williams

Wall St. will keep close iWatch on Apple product (Boston Herald): “It is clear that Apple needs to create a new category and do it soon. A watch is easier to launch than a TV. It’s easier to produce since it is a variation on the iPod mini and the iPhone, and uses the same app structure and Siri plus Bluetooth integration. Moreover, it has global appeal and can rekindle Apple’s cool factor.” N. Venkat Venkatraman

Toyota hires outsiders to help with global growth (AFP): “Toyota’s leadership changes portend a new era. New directors, drawn from beyond Japan’s shores, will help develop a truly global view at the top.”  James Post

If the Catholic Church were a business, how would you fix it? (NPR “All Things Considered”): “Without systematic accounting and disclosure, there is enough doubt these days about how money is being managed that we don’t know  whether the hungry are being fed, the naked are being clothed and those in need are getting health care and education.”  James Post

Apple’s cash drama is far from over (MarketWatch): “It’s the real human drama here, and it certainly is a corporate drama. This sort of has it all, an iconic company which has been doing extraordinarily well and has buckets of cash, billions of buckets of cash. [Apple CEO] Tim Cook and the board are the ones in the hot seat here. They have to make a decision about distribution or no distribution and they have to have some compelling explanation for whatever they choose.” James Post

Mayo, a financial powerhouse, is poised to propel expansion (Minnesota Public Radio): “From a profitability standpoint they are successful. I don’t doubt people will step forward and write large checks. In a 20-year period, they should be able to successfully put together a package of financing and donations that’ll allow them to do this.” Elizabeth Keating

No longer unsung, Samsung turns up heat on Apple (Boston Herald): “I think 2013 is a watershed year for Apple. Will it lose to Google-Samsung dominance … or will it show true innovation with the phone and its strong ecosystem?” N. Venkat Venkatraman

Is the banking system healthy? (Washington Post): “Investors expect more losses ahead. Many of these banks still have loans that could go bad if the economy goes south.” Mark Williams

Deferred pay draws Fed’s scrutiny (Wall Street Journal): “The lack of data on deferred compensation has benefited top-paid U.S. bankers and disadvantaged otherwise concerned shareholders.” Mark Williams

Behind the mega airlines merger (NECN): “They need each other. American Airlines is in bankruptcy and US Air is a smaller competitor on the East coast and in other places and it’s getting dominated by other big competitors that are out there. They just need each other.” Allen Michel

How governments spur private-sector demand for green buildings (Forbes): “Input suppliers such as game developers won’t invest until there is sufficient demand, or a large installed base, but demand won’t arise until there is an ample supply of key inputs. In our setting, government green-building procurement policies can stimulate private-sector building professionals to gain expertise in LEED, while also bolstering private-sector demand for LEED buildings.” Timothy Simcoe

There could be something wrong with 42 million credit reports (Business Insider): “Most people do not realize how many prices are affected by their credit scores.  Even what you pay for car insurance depends on it. The FTC report seems to suggest that the rate of serious error is only about 5%, but that is enough to make it worth checking whether the information the credit reporting agencies have on you is correct.” Michael Salinger

The biggest financial asset in your portfolio is you (New York Times): “I see myself, for example, as a convertible bond. I’m protected by tenure at a solid university and have the potential to do extra things for income. I have a lot more capacity to take risk in my portfolio than I choose to use. I’m risk-averse, don’t like to gamble and don’t get a kick out of winning. I hate to lose.” Zvi Bodie

Fatigued users fall away from Facebook (TechNewsWorld): “It is inevitable that people will feel tired after an initial euphoria. Even if people spend less time but they find that time to be useful and valuable, Facebook can monetize it. Otherwise, it is a troubling sign.” N. Venkat Venkatraman

Does an ‘A’ in ethics have any value (Wall Street Journal): “We need to hit the students hard when they first get here, remind them of these principles throughout their core classes, and hit them once again before they leave.” Kabrina Chang

Creating the ‘innovative mindset’ (Telegram & Gazette): “I don’t think is something as concrete as gravity. If you are in a public trade organization you have to guaranty innovation every year, all the time.” Susan Fournier

The definition of torture in the UN convention against torture, ratified by the Senate of the United States, is ‘cruel, degrading and inhumane.’  This treaty only confirms anti-torture statutes in U.S. law.  There is some subjectivity on what torture means in this phrase but not much.  It is clear what torture is.  The convention also prohibits the transfer of individuals to countries that traditionally use torture.

The enhanced interrogation techniques fall into two categories:  one reflects torture as defined above (waterboarding used three times, sleep deprivation beyond a certain limit, nudity) while others (a grab or a slam) is not.  All the techniques were monitored to ensure they did not get out of hand.

Everyone knows these techniques came out of the military’s SERE program.  Everyone knows the legal reasoning by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to justify enhanced interrogation.  What no one knows is who was sitting at the table making the decision to go ahead with enhanced interrogation as a means to gain intelligence.

Did anyone ask if this was illegal or inappropriate for a country which issues, by law, an annual human rights report card on the rest of the world?  Did anyone say I am not doing this?  Did anyone ask how Americans could legally do outside the country what is illegal inside the country?  Did anyone ask what happened to the enlightenment?

Partisanship will dilute the Senate report.  In briefing members of Congress, I heard the refrain more than once from partisan politicians, ‘We have to move on.’  It really means we cannot deal with what happened because I might have to take some responsibility for the President I support.  Or, we might have to change.

Republicans circled the wagons on weapons of mass destruction (the Silbermann/Robb report was terribly flawed) and will, with exceptions like Senator McCain, do so with this report as well.  The problem then becomes we never get better and we never are able to avoid the same mistakes.

The bottom line on this report should be torture is wrong under all circumstances.  That means sometimes our citizens could get hurt.  Torture may or may not work but it is always wrong to use it.

Like the Iraq war, the above policies reflected the hysteria which swept the country after 9/11.  What the country needed at that time was leadership on the core values of the United States and its political and economic interests in the world.   What it got was self-destructive policies from which the country has not yet either fully recuperated or confronted.

Contact Wippl at 617-353-8992 or jwippl@bu.edu.