As a former journalist, I find it hard to believe that some Michigan journalists are actually considering voting in Tuesday's presidential primary.
According to the Grand Rapids Press, the issue has come up this year because you have to ask for a particular party's ballot in this primary and lists will be kept and given to the parties indicating voters' party preferences.
I'm sorry, but I don't think journalists should ever be voting in political primaries, whether party preferences are secret or open.
Political primaries are not elections. They are a short-cut, more democratic way for political parties to pick their candidates rather than going through caucuses, conventions, or smoke-filled rooms.
Should journalists feel free to participate in any of those? Of course not.
I seriously doubt any journalists participated in the Iowa caucuses. And the purpose of the Iowa caucuses is identical to the purposes of the Michigan primary. Journalistic norms are much stricter in Iowa about issues like this. Before leaving journalism in 1997, I had only voted in one primary in my life, and that was many years ago.
Things are looser here in Michigan.
This primary should not be any different from ones where voters' party preferences were kept secret.
Journalists should stay out of partisan political activity. That includes giving money to candidates, holding membership in a party, and voting in a primary, whether anybody knows about it or not.
5 comments:
As a former journalist and current blogger, I don't think I could disagree more. I understand the process is for the parties, but I want the best candidates. If I was a staff writer I would not be happy that people knew which party I voted for, but it really does not matter much.
Well, I'd agree with the Guru if our ballots were actually secret.
But since your party choice is going to be recorded and handed over to the parties -- and you don't get to see it, even though you PAID for it -- I'd think it would be tough for a journalist to vote in this one.
You know darn well that both parties will be combing through those lists and "somehow" the word will get out about which journalists took which ballot (as well as community leaders, teachers, etc.). Everything you wrote from there on in would be suspect by one side or the other.
I, unfortunately, agree with you. I may be old fashioned, but the right to vote is a basic fundamental right, and I am not going to forfeit it because someone is going to call my paper or me the “liberal media.” They do that now with zero proof and even proof to the contrary.
Amen, Guru.
Judy, this is the most anti-American thing you've ever written. Journalists are Americans, too, and as such, they have the right to decide who they want representing them in office. Especially in a county like Livingston, where most of the elections are decided in the primary anyway.
Your arrogance is absolutely astounding.
I don't know if Judy is arrogant, but she is a flip-flopper. Isn't she the same person who was ripping Argus editor Mike Malott because he said he wasn't going to vote in the primary? And now she says that journalists SHOULDN'T vote in the primary?
You need to get your story straight, sister.
Post a Comment