What's fair? It is an old question in journalism. In 1999, it seems more difficult to answer than ever. The cycle of story, spin, and counterspin that surrounds the White House is only the most obvious part of the problem. In the past 25 years, the practice of journalism has changed enormously--particularly in the United States. The demarcation of public and private life that once ruled certain kinds of stories out-of-bounds has eroded, leaving reporters with the unenviable challenge of having to cover events whose seaminess inevitably taints all who touch them. Commercial pressures, and a tidal wave of information and entertainment media, have engulfed the news business--leaving the definitions of journalism and journalistic standards vague and uncertain. And the technology of news reporting is speeding up news cycles in ways that leave little time for sober and measured judgments. "What's Fair?" is a collection of essays from experts in the field that are sure to spark compelling questions and ideas about journalism and its place in our time. In "Fairness--A Struggle," journalists explore a subject that they normally share only with close friends and colleagues--their own struggles with fairness that occurred in places as different as South Africa, Washington, and the South Bronx. In "Fairness--A History," nine contributors examine the history of the fairness question, specifically the establishment of the Hutchins Commission report of 1947, which is evaluated here by a historian, a journalist and a First Amendment authority. In a comparative vein, two authorities on international communications law examine British regulations for fairness in broadcasting at the end of the 20th century. In "Fairness--A Goal," contributors explore what struggles for fairness mean in a variety of contexts, from American newsrooms to post-Communist Poland to Northern Ireland. Many discussions of fairness are either numbingly abstract or impossibly righteous. To avoid those hazards, Robert Giles and Robert Snyder have grounded this volume in stories--the kind of stories journalists tell each other and the kind of stories people tell about journalism. This volume is a testament to journalism that is free yet fair, probing yet credible and authoritative in content yet open to many voices. "Robert Giles" is editor-in-chief of "Media Studies Journal," senior vice president of the Freedom Forum and executive director of Media Studies Center. Formerly the editor and publisher of "The Detroit News," he is the author of "Newsroom Management: A Guide to Theory and Practice. "Robert W. Snyder" is editor of the "Media Studies Journal," a historian, and most recently author of "Transit Talk: New York's Bus and Subway Workers Tell Their Stories. He has taught at Princeton University and New York University, from which he holds a doctorate in history. ""

Minorities in the Open Society (1986) challenges optimistic assumptions regarding race relations in western nations, namely that social justice will prevail without much effort. It examines the interests behind public affirmations of commitment to integration, and presents a range of contemporary and historical material which illustrate the double-binds created for minorities by the dominant communities, who offer equality with one hand while obstructing it with the other. Individual members of minorities may be given the opportunity to achieve social prominence - but only to carry out special jobs on behalf of the majority.

What's fair? It is an old question in journalism. In 1999, it seems more difficult to answer than ever. The cycle of story, spin, and counterspin that surrounds the White House is only the most obvious part of the problem. In the past 25 years, the practice of journalism has changed enormously--particularly in the United States. The demarcation of public and private life that once ruled certain kinds of stories out-of-bounds has eroded, leaving reporters with the unenviable challenge of having to cover events whose seaminess inevitably taints all who touch them. Commercial pressures, and a tidal wave of information and entertainment media, have engulfed the news business--leaving the definitions of journalism and journalistic standards vague and uncertain. And the technology of news reporting is speeding up news cycles in ways that leave little time for sober and measured judgments.What's Fair? is a collection of essays from experts in the field that are sure to spark compelling questions and ideas about journalism and its place in our time. In "Fairness--A Struggle," journalists explore a subject that they normally share only with close friends and colleagues--their own struggles with fairness that occurred in places as different as South Africa, Washington, and the South Bronx. In "Fairness--A History," nine contributors examine the history of the fairness question, specifically the establishment of the Hutchins Commission report of 1947, which is evaluated here by a historian, a journalist and a First Amendment authority. In a comparative vein, two authorities on international communications law examine British regulations for fairness in broadcasting at the end of the 20th century. In "Fairness--A Goal," contributors explore what struggles for fairness mean in a variety of contexts, from American newsrooms to post-Communist Poland to Northern Ireland.Many discussions of fairness are either numbingly abstract or impossibly righteous. To avoid those hazards, Robert Giles and Robert Snyder have grounded this volume in stories--the kind of stories journalists tell each other and the kind of stories people tell about journalism. This volume is a testament to journalism that is free yet fair, probing yet credible and authoritative in content yet open to many voices.Robert Giles is editor-in-chief of Media Studies Journal, senior vice president of the Freedom Forum and executive director of Media Studies Center. Formerly the editor and publisher of The Detroit News, he is the author of Newsroom Management: A Guide to Theory and Practice.Robert W. Snyder is editor of the Media Studies Journal, a historian, and most recently author of Transit Talk: New York's Bus and Subway Workers Tell Their Stories. He has taught at Princeton University and New York University, from which he holds a doctorate in history.

Using the storyThe Frog Princeas a symbol of traditional awareness of the potential marginality of men in society,Transforming Menproposes that much of patriarchy is a theatrical illusion. Presenting men as more important and powerful than they really are should be seen as a way of controlling them, rather than as a system for dominating women. The author believes that both men and women need to feel that other people are dependent on them. Dench states that women acquire a sense of responsibility through the direct dependence of children, but most men can only come to experience responsibility via women. If women reject the male breadwinning role, then men will never develop the altruistic incentive. Dench urges that men need to be given a greater stake than women in the public realm in order to be the main family providers and become caring members of society. Dispensing with male privileges and formal positions, the author continues, will simply reveal and revive older and deeper problems, to which patriarchy itself was a historical and sociological solution. Dench does not deny the possibility that if men did behave as feminists have asked or expected, then certainly we would be living in a far better world. However, he asserts that it is too simple to just blame men for the fact that this has not happened; perhaps the real failure lies in feminist approaches and theories. Thus, Dench persuasively argues that feminism may be making the male problem worse, not better by insisting on everything from absolute parity to role reversal. Transforming Mencontains examples of many different feminist viewpoints, including those of Margaret Mead, Betty Friedan, and Camille Paglia. It also uses contemporary cultural instances, such as popular movies, television shows, and books, to emphasize its points. This volume presents an intriguing argument regarding feminism versus a patriarchal society. It will provide stimulating reading for all those interested in the feminist debate.

Most accounts of ethnic and race relations in Western states are optimistic at heart.They assume that equal participation by minorities will be achieved because it is a "public good" from which citizens will benefi t. Social justice will prevail. In this topical and disturbing book, Geoff Dench challenges these idealistic commentaries, showing that in many instances they do not produce convincing analyses of the position of minorities. He suggests that analysts neglect to explore the web of real interests behind public affi rmations of commitment to integration.

Most accounts of ethnic and race relations in Western states are optimistic at heart. They assume that equal participation by minorities will be achieved, because it is a "public good" from which citizens will benefit. Social justice will prevail. In this topical and disturbing book, Geoff Dench challenges these idealistic commentaries, showing that in many instances they do not produce convincing analyses of the position of minorities. He suggests that analysts neglect to explore the web of real interests behind public affirmations of commitment to integration.
In his new introduction, the author suggests how the postwar meritocracy in Britain may have used a progressive alliance with minorities in order to help establish itself as a new ruling class. Part 1 of this volume looks briefly at the dual character of modern states; Part 2 explores one of the key services that minority clients perform on behalf of their national masters, namely the exercise of integrative leadership during periods of political crisis and change. Part 3 develops the theme that although the ambiguities of minority status can create special types of opportunity for ambitious individuals, in general they result in dilemmas which members of dominant communities can exploit in order to underline their supremacy. Part 4 takes up some questions raised earlier about the nature of the forces in modern society that impinge on minorities and addresses the implications for a host state of containing oppressed groups.
In putting forward his controversial argument, Dench presents a range of contemporary and historical material which illustrates the double-binds created for minorities by dominant communities. Such communities offer equality with one hand while obstructing it with the other. Individual members of minorities may be given the opportunity to achieve social prominence-but only to carry out special jobs on behalf of the majority. Various cases are examined: how Disraeli, a Jew, nationalized British Conservatism; how Stalin, a Georgian, reconstructed the ailing Russian Empire; and how Trudeau, the Quebecois, preserved Canadian unity and anglophone supremacy within it. This fascinating exploration of the contradictions inherent in the status of new minorities will be interesting for the general reader as well as managers of public policy, scholars, and students in the field.
Geoff Dench is senior research fellow at the Institute of Community Studies and at University College, London. He is the editor of "Transforming Men" and "Rewriting the Sexual Contact," both published by Transaction.

Over the past few years there has been a surge of interest in Britain on grandparenting - although it is still a long way behind the USA and several European countries in research in the area. The driving impetus for research is coming from parenting organizations and government departments concerned about the effects on female employment of shortages in nursery places, and about the effect of "parenting deficits" on children. Greater involvement of grandmothers in caring for children has seemed to offer a solution to many related problems. It promises to improve care within the family, and enable mothers to take on paid work with fewer fears for the consequences, without removing other working adults in the family from their jobs. This text discusses how today's grandmothers are changing the image and role that they filled in the past.

Using the storyThe Frog Princeas a symbol of traditional awareness of the potential marginality of men in society, Transforming Menproposes that much of patriarchy is a theatrical illusion. Presenting men as more important and powerful than they really are should be seen as a way of controlling them, rather than as a system for dominating women. The author believes that both men and women need to feel that other people are dependent on them.

Dench states that women acquire a sense of responsibility through the direct dependence of children, but most men can only come to experience responsibility via women. If women reject the male breadwinning role, then men will never develop the altruistic incentive. Dench urges that men need to be given a greater stake than women in the public realm in order to be the main family providers and become caring members of society. Dispensing with male privileges and formal positions, the author continues, will simply reveal and revive older and deeper problems, to which patriarchy itself was a historical and sociological solution.

Dench does not deny the possibility that if men did behave as feminists have asked or expected, then certainly we would be living in a far better world. However, he asserts that it is too simple to just blame men for the fact that this has not happened; perhaps the real failure lies in feminist approaches and theories. Thus, Dench persuasively argues that feminism may be making the male problem worse, not better by insisting on everything from absolute parity to role reversal.

Transforming Mencontains examples of many different feminist viewpoints, including those of Margaret Mead, Betty Friedan, and Camille Paglia. It also uses contemporary cultural instances, such as popular movies, television shows, and books, to emphasize its points. This volume presents an intriguing argument regarding feminism versus a patriarchal society. It will provide stimulating reading for all those interested in the feminist debate.