Constructive criticism by journalists

In our discussion of journalism ethics on Monday, we talked about how a journalist's job is to inform the public and present them with both sides of a story. Journalists should not be biased in reporting, they should be objective and let their decide for themselves what they believe.

Sean Keeler wrote a column earlier this week about the Iowa football team. Granted, as a columnist rather than a reporter, Keeler is allowed to give his opinion, I thought he wrote a good article. The Hawkeyes have underachieved this season and it has been popular for writers to bash them. However instead of bashing the Hawks, Keeler does a good job of posing his question to readers. He asks why Iowa doesn't change their style of play to compete with the changing game of college football. Their style of play brought them much success for the last six or seven years, but for the last two other teams have found ways to beat it. He gives some stats to back up his argument. Then he provides a few answers and suggestions, but he leaves it pretty much up to the reader to make their own opinion.

"The Hawkeyes won't become a top 25 program again just by rolling out of bed. You can win here. You can win consistently. But you have to work harder. You have to work smarter. You have to adapt. Beat the curve. Innovation has carried this program before. It can carry it again. All you have to do is spread your wings."

This is how Keeler ended his column. He was positive overall which I thought was a good thing. By being negative, he only would have contributed to the problem the way that every other columnist does. It almost seems as if he poses a challenge to the Iowa coaching staff and players to step it up. He provides constructive criticism. Going back to the goals of journalists, Keeler did a good job of being objective even for a columnist.