<p>I am very involved in journalism in my highschool, I'm wondering what Columbia's publications are like. </p>
<p>How hard is it to work for the Daily Spectator? If any of you are on it, Is it a worthwhile experience, what is it like?</p>
<p>It's not hard at all -- show up to the Open House during Orientation. Anybody can write for the Spectator (after a brief period of mandatory training). You can choose to be as involved as you like, ranging from writing an article whenever you feel like it to assuming an editor position, where you work in the office more often. </p>
<p>Being on the Spectator is a very worthwhile experience, in my opinion (even if you decide not to stick with it through college, it's still cool to try it out and see how a daily paper works). With Columbia's prominence and location in the city, there is alot to cover (the ongoing Manhattanville expansion project, for one). I believe there have also even been times when the Spectator has broken news before the NY Times. </p>
<p>There are also numerous other Columbia publications out there (The Blue and White, the monthly lit magazine, is another big one), which you can check out.</p>
<p>How is the Spectator by the way? As in, is it generally a very recognized source of information? Is it biased? I know for example the Daily Pennsylvanian wins a lot of awards. Is the Spectator similarly recognized?</p>
<p>
[quote]
How is the Spectator by the way? As in, is it generally a very recognized source of information?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's a college newspaper. If you read it every day, you'll know more than you ever need to know about issues of campus politics (e.g., housing, dining, academics, general gripes) and Columbia sports.</p>
<p>Is it a recognized source of information for non-Columbia news? Given the existence of the internet, I'm not sure why you'd pick up the Spec if you wanted to find out about what's happening in Washington or Iraq.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is it biased?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Isn't everything? Some of the editorials are about national/international current-event type issues, and they're obviously biased (an editorial is supposed to be). An article interviewing various students about why the housing lottery sucks isn't going to really cause you to worry about bias.</p>
<p>To ask whether or not a newspaper is biased is a legit question. Everyone knows editorials and the opinion section are biased by definition. However, whether or not the rest of the paper has high journalistic standards is a real issue.
"It's a college newspaper" doesn't really say much these days. A Newsweek article pointed out that a lot of college newspapers (mostly Ivy League ones, especially Upenn) are not only more popular than local papers, but they also have a wider/greater audience, which is linked to a better legitimacy. I actually wouldn't be surprised if unexperienced college kids would be better journalists; "better" in the sense that they bring this fresh look to the world, something that is lacking in professional journalism. Even my high school paper could serve as a good news source for the non-school community. We included stuff like the U.N. or bills in Florida. I think, or I hope, the Spectator is definitely capable of covering news beyond housing and sports. </p>
<p>In any case, a newspaper is a good newspaper if it is a legitimate source of information. This does not only refer to the width of information, but also the way they approach it. For example, It is very easy to editorialize news through only revealing selective information, and to do so would be biased. At the same time, each paper has its own style and maybe even political views. However, those should be reserved for the Opinion section and the political tone should not dominate the rest of the sections. If they can do this, no matter how liberal or conservative their "bias" appears in editorials, they are a fair and valuable news source. </p>
<p>Just a personal opinion, but the Spectator would trump the professional papers in my city any day.</p>
<p>There ARE some right-wing articles in the Spec, but it's more left-wing. It's a really high-quality college newspaper, though (my boyfriend has a column so I edit it :) )</p>
<p>Local newspapers (in non-major markets) really don't cover much news outside of the local context. They just use wire/feeds from the major news bureaus. And the same can be said about the Spec. The spec doesn't have reporters in the field covering the major news events around the nation and the world. There isn't much for them to report in terms of news, and the Spec rightly mostly sticks to campus-related issues.</p>
<p>Thanks for the responses.</p>
<p>From this, then, the Daily Pennsylvanian--despite the awards and praise it gets, or so I heard--would have its limits too, as its sources are second-hand?</p>
<p>So we have two people here saying the Spectator is great.</p>
<p>"as its sources are second-hand"</p>
<p>Who said they were? Spectator reporters most definitely do actual first-hand reporting in the areas they cover. I've been impressed by the journalistic work they've done in the past (for example, unearthing a document showing that the University was considering eminent domain). The Spec doesn't cover national news or international news because a college paper isn't the place for that (though occasionally, int'l/nat'l news is discussed with a Columbia tie-in). </p>
<p>The Spec has a readership of 10,000-ish, and serves a good chunk of the Morningside Heights community, in addition to the Columbia campus (they also put out a weekly newsletter in Spanish). I also believe it is the 6th or 7th largest (English) newspaper in New York City. </p>
<p>I do not know enough about the Daily Pennsylvanian's reputation to speak for it in comparison to the Spectator.</p>
<p>I don't know anything about Penn's paper. But, the Spec's graduating editor this year is going on to the Washington Post Metro section, which means that the Post has some respect for the newspaper she's helped put out at Columbia. (I do believe she is graduating from Barnard. Please don't turn this into another but Barnard is not Columbia thread...:) ) The first-year columnist for the Spec also just won a national award for her column.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I also believe it is the 6th or 7th largest (English) newspaper in New York City.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The Spec is probably better written than the throw-away papers that you get in the subway, which have huge circ numbers.</p>
<p>What's the conservative rag called?</p>
<p>go to <a href="http://www.columbiaspectator.com%5B/url%5D">www.columbiaspectator.com</a> and search for columns written by "Chris Kulawik"; he is also the new president of the college republicans. "Tao Tan" is another right-winged contributor. </p>
<p>I may be mistaken, but I believe we have more right-wing columnists than left-wings.</p>
<p>invictus: referring to conservative pieces within the Spec or left-wing campus publications?</p>
<p>Is there a columbia equivalent of dartmouth review harvard salient yale light and truth etc?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is there a columbia equivalent of dartmouth review harvard salient yale light and truth etc?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There really is no equivalent of the Dartmouth Review, anywhere. No conservative rag has the influence / history / alumni roll that they have. Nobody's heard of the H and Y rags that you mentioned.</p>
<p>Agreed (with some hesitation, IMO you overestimate its present value), but my question was about whether an equivalent-purpose student publication exists at Columbia and not about whether that publication is of the purported same caliber.</p>