Madison resident and Capital Times editor John Nichols joined communication scholar Robert W. McChesney to discuss the current state of print and online journalism, with ideas to save the dying industry. Of note to my readers:

The Internet and blogosphere, too, depend in large part on “old media” to do original journalism. Web links still refer readers mostly to stories that first appeared in print. Even in more optimistic scenarios, no one has a business model to sustain digital journalism beyond a small number of self-supporting services. The attempts of newspapers to shift their operations online have been commercial failures, as they trade old media dollars for new media pennies. We are enthusiastic about Wikipedia and the potential for collaborative efforts on the web; they can help democratize our media and politics. But they do not replace skilled journalists on the ground covering the events of the day and doing investigative reporting. Indeed, the Internet cannot achieve its revolutionary potential as a citizens’ forum without such journalism.

So this is where we stand: much of local and state government, whole federal departments and agencies, American activities around the world, the world itself–vast areas of great public concern–are either neglected or on the verge of neglect. Politicians and administrators will work increasingly without independent scrutiny and without public accountability. We are entering historically uncharted territory in America, a country that from its founding has valued the press not merely as a watchdog but as the essential nurturer of an informed citizenry. The collapse of journalism and the democratic infrastructure it sustains is not a development that anyone, except perhaps corrupt politicians and the interests they serve, looks forward to. Such a crisis demands solutions equal to the task. So what are they?

A dearth of traditional media reporting on local and state government will come as no surprise to readers of the Madison blogosphere. The same readers might also notice trends in blogging as picked up by some during the past year:

2. It’s all about niche blogs. If you have a particular expertise and unique perspective, they you can quickly gain a following. Everyone else is out of luck.

4. Blogger Burn Out. Many of the top bloggers have been absorbed into some other professional enterprise or are burnt. It’s a lot of work to blog. Most bloggers, and not just the A-listers, spend 3-5 hours every day blogging. That’s hard to maintain, especially since there is no money in this. They used that time to not only write their posts and monitor their comment sections, but to read and foster other bloggers. Blogging survived based on the goodwill and generosity of others. It’s probably no coincidence that every blogger that I’ve met face-to-face is an extraordinarily nice person. But it’s hard to volunteer that much time over a long period of time.

5. Reader burn out. You all are not clicking on the links like you used to. I’m not really sure why. In the past, if I was linked to by a big mega blogger, it meant 10,000 new readers in one afternoon. Now, a link by a mega blogger sends over a couple hundred readers. Readers are probably tired out of trying new stuff. Maybe we’ve sent you to too many crappy places over time and you’re sick of it.

2, 4, and 5 on this list are of note to me. These concerns directly relate to the academic research done on web 2.0 communication:

Drezner and Farrell had a theory that even small potato bloggers would have their day in the sun, if they wrote something so great that it garnered the attention of the big guys. But the big guys are too burnt out to find the hidden gems. So, good stuff is being written all the time, and it isn’t bubbling to the top.

So what’s next?

Niche blogging, in my opinion, is the future of local and national blog websites. A particular set of interests and skill sets will translate into interesting content – of course, under-covered in traditional media outlets already reeling from staff cutbacks – and hypothetically, a reader base welcoming to unique commentary.

Still, niche blogging has its drawbacks:

Laura is definitely onto something — professionalization, partisanship and speciaization have hit the blogosphere pretty hard.  The linksearch problem might be abetting this — like Laura, I have more difficulty now tracing who’s linked to my posts than I did a few years ago.

That said, I will defend the “focal point” argument Henry and I made oh so many moons ago.  When the unexpected happens in the world, I do think new blogs and new bloggers can emerge rapidly.  Think of Simon Johnson’s Calculated Risk Baseline Scenario blog in response to the global financial crisis, or Tehran Bureau in response to the Iran election imbroglio.

The difference might be that new bloggers are not exactly neophytes on their subject matter.  Johnson was the IMF’s chief economist, for example.  My fellow bloggers here at Foreign Policy are not exactly novices in the subject matter.  So it might be more accurate to say that the days when someone like Matt Yglesias or Kevin Drum could be vaulted into the top tier of bloggers has come to an end.

Who knows what the next technology will be that takes the online community by storm. Maybe a web 3.0?

Just in case you missed it, the web now has version numbers. Nearly three years ago, amid continued hand-wringing over the dot-com crash, a man named Dale Dougherty dreamed up something called Web 2.0, and the idea soon took on a life of its own. In the beginning, it was little more than a rallying cry, a belief that the Internet would rise again. But as Dougherty’s Silicon Valley start-ups—and blogs are already abuzz with talk of the Web’s next generation.

To many, Web 3.0 is something called the Semantic Web, a term coined by Tim Berners-Lee, the man who invented the (first) World Wide Web. In essence, the Semantic Web is a place where machines can read Web pages much as we humans read them, a place where search engines and software agents can better troll the Net and find what we’re looking for. “It’s a set of standards that turns the Web into one big database,” says Nova Spivack, CEO of Radar Networks, one of the leading voices of this new-age Internet.

It will be interesting to see what the future holds in store.

The Critical Badger is on hiatus. Any comments and questions can be sent to criticalbadger@gmail.com. I will be helping the gang over at University and State reform their website and perhaps from time to time add my own commentary on a different set of subjects. I predict mostly higher education and legal topics. I ask that my ebb into private life be respected as I have equally shown for so many over the years. Thank you all for making this online community something special.

When I heard of the new Forbes college rankings, I hoped it would bring a substantial counterbalance to the dominant US News ranking culture that continues to infect all aspects of higher education in America.

That was, until I saw its methodology.

While trying to tear a page from the big-sellng (and much-debated) U.S. News and World Report annual rankings issue, Forbes goes to some lengths to explain why its ratings should be taken more seriously than others.

Here’s how the magazine’s editors, working with the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, a Washington think tank, explained their methodology:

To our way of thinking, a good college is one that meets student needs. While some college rankings are based partly on school reputation as evaluated by college administrators and on the amount of money spent, we focus on things which directly concern incoming students: Will my courses be interesting and rewarding? Will I get a good job after I graduate? Is it likely I will graduate in four years? Will I incur a ton of debt getting my degree?

To answer these questions, the staff at CCAP gathered data from a variety of sources. They based 25 percent of the rankings on 4 million student evaluations of courses and instructors, as recorded on the Web site RateMyProfessors.com. Another 25 percent is based on post-graduate success, equally determined by enrollment-adjusted entries in Who’s Who in America, and by a new metric, the average salaries of graduates reported by Payscale.com. An additional 20 percent is based on the estimated average student debt after four years.

The remaining 30 percent, for those keeping score, involves such factors as graduation rates, as well as students and faculty who have won prizes.

Ratemyprofessor.com? Hardly an articulate mechanism to judge faculty quality. Even if it means waiting, I’d prefer research by groups such as the NRC (albeit something tailored to undergraduate education) or respected professors in the field.

As for Who’s Who in America, what’s with the profit motive?

It must be a good list, since many Honored Biographees clearly have a weakness for ordering schlocky products through the mail. Marquis makes certain they have plenty to buy. The company’s “Reflections of Success” catalog advertises an entire line of Who’s Who-related junk, from Who’s Who lapel pins (at $52.95 plus shipping and handling, they “quietly declare your accomplishments”) to Who’s Who key rings, paperweights and crystal boxes. The home office seems to do a particularly brisk business in commemorative wall plaques, which at close to $100 apiece doubtless make for a profitable little sideline.

One of the latest offerings from Marquis is the Who’s Who/Chevy Chase Bank MasterCard. Cardholders are eligible for a discount on any merchandise they buy from the Who’s Who catalogue, which brings the entire enterprise full circle. I’m not listed in any of the Who’s Who volumes, but I decided to order one anyway, mostly to see if I could. I could. The moment my MasterCard arrived, I called Who’s Who. “One sterling lapel pin, please,” I said. “I’m interested in quietly declaring some of my achievements.” “Which book are you included in?” the woman asked. None, I said. She didn’t seem fazed in the slightest. “Well, you have to be listed,” she said brightly. “But you can talk to the editorial department about that. I’ll transfer you.”

These components make up half of the data for the Forbes ranking!

Student debt, graduate rate, and the ambiguous “prizes” metric are somewhat warranted. However, it seems the military academies – where you have no debt … because they are free – are given skewed benefit in this publication. Several service academies including West Point, Air Force, the Citadel, and VMI made the top 20 for public schools. No Wisconsin. No Texas.

Suspect.

Look, I’m all for alternatives to the US News and World report, but sometimes the alternative methodologies produce equally debatable results. Of course, Forbes loves this (featured on several cable news morning shows over the past week) and any “new” top school ranking will generate buzz for the ranking itself. Forbes gets attention and the newly crowned kings of American colleges celebrate. A beautiful self-fulfilling prophecy. Everyone involved wins!

Paying to get an internship? Who can afford such a thing. So much for the ol’ ‘pull yourself up by the bootstraps’ maxim.

NYT:

With paying jobs so hard to get in this weak market, a lot of college graduates would gladly settle for a nonpaying internship. But even then, they are competing with laid-off employees with far more experience.

So growing numbers of new graduates — or, more often, their parents — are paying thousands of dollars to services that help them land internships.

Call these unpaid internships that you pay for.

“It’s kind of crazy,” said David Gaston, director of the University of Kansas career center. “The demand for internships in the past 5, 10 years has opened up this huge market. At this point, all we can do is teach students to understand that they’re paying and to ask the right questions.”

Not that the parents are complaining. Andrew Topel’s parents paid $8,000 this year to a service that helped their son, a junior at the University of Tampa, get a summer job as an assistant at Ford Models, a top agency in New York.

Even after the Madison Initiative for Undergraduates (read: a tuition increase, for all you non-UW readers), look at how UW stacks up:

Tuition

1 Northwestern University

Tuition: $38,461
Percent increase: 3.6 percent
Increase per semester: about $660

2 Penn State University

Tuition: $13,604
Percent increase: 4.5 percent (for the University Park campus)
Increase per semester: $295

3 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Tuition: $12,660-$16,978 (based on major and other program fees)
Percent increase: 2.6 percent
Increase per semester: $121

4 University of Michigan

Tuition: $11,659
Percent increase: 5.6 percent
Increase per semester: $622

5 University of Minnesota

Tuition: $11,476
Percent increase: 3.1 percent
Increase per semester: about $310

6 Michigan State University

Tuition: $10,804
Percent increase: 5.2 percent
increase per semester: $540

7 Indiana University

Tuition: $8,613
Percent increase: 4.6 percent
Increase per semester: $382 (Bloomington campus)

8 Ohio State University
Tuition: $8,406
Percent increase: 0 percent
Increase per semester: $0

9 Purdue University

Tuition: $8,138 (does not count a new $500 fee to fund the strategic plan as it will be rebated for freshman using stimulus money)
Percent increase: 5 percent
Increase per semester: $388

10 University of Wisconsin-Madison

Tuition: $8,020
Percent increase: 5.5 percent
increase per semester: about $220

11 The University of Iowa

Tuition: $6,824
Percent increase: 4.2 percent
Increase per semester: about $140

If you can’t raise money from the state and private investment is down, where else is there to turn, especially when you already have one of the lowest in-state rates among peers? Even after the second highest Big Ten tuition bump (just after Michigan), Wisconsin remains affordable.

$timulus:

Already, 90 awards totaling more than $26.5 million have been made to UW-Madison faculty under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Wisconsin projects ranging from stem cell research and new genetic models for cancer to Antarctic weather stations and bioenergy have been funded by the various federal agencies disbursing stimulus funds.

“The stimulus funds are going to provide a much-needed shot in the arm for UW-Madison research across the board,” says UW-Madison Provost Paul M. DeLuca, who, as associate dean for research in the UW-Madison School of Medicine and Public Health, played a role in securing stimulus funding for several key biomedical initiatives. “These funds will help us expand the margins of knowledge, of course, but they also represent a new source of support for our research infrastructure, which leads to well-paying jobs in our community.”

The flow of stimulus money to the UW-Madison campus is only likely to accelerate as federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation complete the process of vetting thousands of proposals, according to Kim Moreland, director of UW-Madison’s Office of Research and Sponsored Programs.

“It’s very slow trickling in,” says Moreland, whose office is responsible for processing grant proposals and managing awards.

A total of 705 proposals totaling more than $421 million were made by UW-Madison faculty to nine different federal agencies or associated entities under very tight deadlines and additional reporting requirements. At least 12 more awards totaling an additional $6.1 million are in the process of being set up.

UW researchers are playing a role in the federal government’s push to increase investment in community colleges around the country. Obama’s for it, as was George W. Bush.

A report released in May and co-authored by UW-Madison professors Sara Goldrick-Rab and Douglas Harris argued that community colleges are in need of significant government investment if the United States is to help more of its people get a formal education and better compete with others from around the globe for the best jobs.

“Over the last two centuries, the United States created an advantage over other countries by helping our citizens attain formal education, generating an able workforce and technological advancement,” states the report, which was also co-written by Christopher Mazzeo of the Consortium on Chicago School Research and Gregory Kienzl of the Institute for Higher Education Policy. “Yet U.S. higher educational attainment, long considered a ladder to economic and social success, has stalled and now reinforces inequalities between rich and poor America.”

The paper then exhorts Congress and the incoming administration of President Barack Obama “to transform our community colleges into engines of opportunity and prosperity by targeting new investments to those colleges that succeed in helping their students succeed.”

At the time, the 37-page report — titled “Transforming America’s Community Colleges: A Federal Policy Proposal to Expand Opportunity and Promote Economic Prosperity” and released by the Brookings Institution, a liberal think tank based in Washington, D.C. — garnered no mainstream media attention.

But some very influential people were taking note.

Goldrick-Rab, the lead author of the document, said Cecilia Rouse of President Obama’s Council for Economic Advisors participated in a panel discussion about the report in May, and it wasn’t long before people in Washington were showing interest in the paper.

And on July 14, Obama unveiled the American Graduation Initiative, a 10-year, $12 billion plan that mirrors much of the Brookings report in calling for a significant increase in investment in community colleges.

So about that 4 year degree? (note the link is a powerpoint from a research presentation)

Four Year Degrees?

On average, workers with associate degrees earn less than those with bachelor’s degrees, but 83 percent of workers with associate degrees earn the same as workers with bachelor’s degrees.

Carnevale and Desrochers, Standards for What?, 2003.

Is your B.A./B.S. going to pay off?

For the city (Allied Drive):

We’re trying to do something that hasn’t been done much in America — dramatically improve a neighborhood and keep it affordable,” Cieslewicz said.Due to efforts by residents, police and others, plus a population drop caused by building closures, conditions have improved.

Police calls fell from 3,825 in 2006 to 1,788 last year. Calls rose in the first half of 2009 but remain lower than the same months from 2004 through 2007.

Neighborhood police officers Samuel Ward and Carren Corcoran say change is dramatic. “It’s a different place,” Corcoran said.

“It’s a lot safer,” West District Capt. Jay Lengfeld said. “You don’t have the open-air drug dealing. You don’t have the violence that gets tied to that. You don’t have the huge gatherings, the big fights.”

But Roberto Moralez, who lives at the fringe of the neighborhood, has concerns. “In the day, it’s OK but not at night,” he said.
“Change takes time,” Artis said. “We still have to engage our young adults, get people in the community engaged in their children’s lives.”

The housing project, Cribbs said, has created a “revitalization attitude” that will push other landlords to “step their game up.”

For the University:

MADISON, Wis. – A University of Wisconsin-Madison law professor has accepted a top job with the Food and Drug Administration.

R. Alta Charo will work as a senior adviser in the Office of the Commissioner starting Aug. 30.

Charo is a national expert on bioethics, including the ethics of embryonic stem cell research.

But in her position at the FDA, she says she will be part of a small group that will think strategically about how to approach new challenges for the agency.

Charo served on President Barack Obama’s FDA transition team and was a member of President Bill Clinton’s bioethics advisory council.

She has a one-year appointment with the option of a second year if mutually agreed.

From the University of Michigan study:

1. The Sconz- OK, this is pretty late, and it got to the point where the site was either (a) obvious to readers or (b) in the summer doldrums not enough attention would be pushed over to his URL. Well, here it is. I recommend the Brunch Links and browse for far more discussion on state politics than you’d ever see here. I’m sure this site will continue to grow.

2. ASM Chair’s new blog- Straight from the top. I assume it’ll be regularly updated during the year. Last year’s Chair did a good job with a few select posts, but let her website drag most of the time. I’d encourage Junger to keep it fresh with content to be both informative and to control the inevitable (and hilarious) “ASM spin” that seems to be what the cool kids do nowadays.

Looks like something straight from Mac Verstandig.

3. Remember the campus elite tournament? Seed #18 has a blog. He advertises on the TV screens at Brats, so I caught wind.

What’s he talking about?

Welcome to the Dean’s List. We will mainly discuss the financial markets, politics, sports (with an emphasis on the NBA/NFL Draft, fantasy sports and college basketball) as well as a variety of matters that touch on society and even popular culture (not my strong suit.)

About the Author: For now, I will be known as D. Kern Bumbaca in an attempt to sidestep google searches from potential employers. If you have found me, well congratulations and I hope you enjoy the blog. I am in the final months of completing my Bachelors degree at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, double majoring in Finance, Investment & Banking as well as Economics.

Interesting article on the impact it has for public law schools. Who’s hit this year?

Administrators planning substantial tuition increases note that they are putting some of that additional revenue toward financial aid. Even so, the tuition increases are bound to heighten the financial burdens of public law school students, who already graduate with an average of $71,436 in law school debt, according to the latest available statistics from the American Bar Association.For example:

• In-state students at Indiana University Maurer School of Law — Bloomington will pay almost 25 percent more in tuition than they paid last year, bringing their tuition from just below $20,000 to nearly $25,000.

• Iowa residents will see tuition increase by nearly 20 percent next year at the University of Iowa College of Law, while out-of-state students will pay an additional 13 percent.

• Tuition at the University of Colorado School of Law is increasing by 16 percent, 20 percent and 12 percent for in-state 1Ls, 2Ls and 3Ls, respectively.

• Resident students at the University of Texas School of Law will pay 16 percent more and nonresidents will see tuition go up by nearly 11 percent.

• Tuition is up 15 percent for in-state 1Ls at the University of Minnesota Law School, while in-state 2Ls, 3Ls and out-of state students will see increases of nearly 8 percent.

Why raise tuition? Wisconsin specific:

Nearly all public law schools rely on a combination of tuition, public money and private donations or revenue from endowments. Public funding has been on the decline for decades at many public law schools, but state funding cuts were especially steep this year as legislators struggled to address deep budget deficits. Some law schools are looking to tuition to help fill those funding gaps.

“We face a cut in state funding, like many other schools, and a decline in the revenue that our endowment produces,” said Kenneth Davis, dean of the University of Wisconsin Law School. “Our tuition differential will account for some of that cut funding.”

The law school will receive approximately $600,000 less in state funding this year — about 5 percent of its operating budget — and will probably raise tuition by $1,200, Davis said. Despite the budget shortfall, the school did not consider boosting the size of the incoming class to generate more tuition revenue. As at many law schools that are part of a large state system, law school tuition money goes to the overall University of Wisconsin system, and the Board of Regents determines the amount that flows back to the law school. Only the differential — the amount of the annual increase — goes directly to the law school, Davis said. Moreover, the tight legal job market is another strong argument against purposely increasing enrollment. “My feeling is that it would be a poor response to the economic times to increase the class size knowing we already have a difficult time placing the students we have,” Davis said. That said, the law school’s incoming class will be 30 or 40 students larger than normal because an unusually high number of accepted students chose to enroll.

The additional students will place a heavier burden on the law school budget, though administrators haven’t calculated that extra cost, said Associate Dean for Administration Bethany A. Pluymers. Because the law school doesn’t see a specific monetary return from the university on a per-student basis, the added costs must be absorbed in the already established budget. “It reduces the resources available per student,” she said.

Impact from the stimulus (why doesn’t the Obama administration play this up more?)

The University of Iowa College of Law saw its general fund budget shrink by 7 percent for the coming year, but that reduction is being cut to 3.2 percent because of funding from the federal government’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, said Dean Carolyn Jones.

Solution? Sounds like something I’ve said before…

Not every top public law school is significantly raising tuition rates this year. The University of Michigan Law School and the University of Virginia School of Law are raising tuition for their students by 4 percent and 5 percent, respectively. Unlike most other public law schools, however, Michigan and Virginia largely follow the private school funding model — with heavy reliance on tuition, endowments and donations. In fact, Virginia’s law school receives no public funding, said Stephen Parr, associate dean for management and finance. The school moved away from state funding in the early 2000s, with the idea that it would have more autonomy and wouldn’t be subject to funding cuts by state legislators, Parr said. Similarly, only about 3 percent of Michigan’s law school budget comes from public funds, said Dean Evan Caminker.

From back in ‘07, I quoted a UW Regent:

“Regent Loftus suggested that UW-Madison is at a tipping point regarding attracting and retaining faculty.  The next budget must reflect hope for investment in the institution’s future.  The Board should consider giving UW-Madison more independence, such as the funding models of Cornell University, the University of Michigan, and the University of Virginia.  These models might provide UW-Madison with a better opportunity to remain a great university in spite of decreasing state support.  Regent President Walsh agreed that the Board should consider alternative funding models.”

It’s not just retaining faculty – now it’s retaining students. The entire point of higher education.

Don’t be scared when you hear “private” being thrown around. It’s about accessibility.

But simply relying on tuition increases to fund operations is not a “limitless strategy,” especially at public schools where tuition is nearly comparable to private schools, Moran said. Higher costs may push out the very people public law schools were intended to teach, Prager said. “As fees become a larger and larger part of law school funding, you begin to worry about what happens to our broad middle class and their access,” Prager said. “Those students have depended on the easy access of student loans, and now people are much more concerned about taking on those loans.”

What’s the alternative?

… in Illinois:

The chairman of the Board of Trustees at the University of Illinois resigned on Monday amid increasingly incendiary accusations that he encouraged an academic version of “pay to play” politics to flourish, allowing students to be admitted based largely on personal and political connections.The chairman, Niranjan S. Shah, an engineering executive, informed Gov. Patrick J. Quinn in a letter that he would step down within 90 days.

Mr. Quinn, who accepted Mr. Shah’s resignation, had set up a commission in June to review admissions at the university after The Chicago Tribune reported that hundreds of applicants won acceptance at the intervention of well-placed family members or friends, including trustees like Mr. Shah.

ASM release:

The ASM Nominations Board announced today that it has recommended Ken Harris, Austin Hetrick, and Callie Otto to serve as the ASM Press Office for the 2009-2010 academic year. Their appointments are subject to confirmation by the full ASM Student Council at its August 22nd meeting.

Senior Ken Harris will serve as the Director of the ASM Press Office. Harris comes to the ASM Press Office after a long stint at the Badger Herald, most recently as News Editor for the spring 2009 semester. As a journalist, he has covered ASM for many years and has been able to transform obtuse ASM proceedings into understandable articles for the student body. He will continue these efforts with the Press Office, serving as a bridge between ASM and the campus media, and a bridge between ASM and the student body.

Joining Harris in the Press Office will be Senior Callie Otto and Junior Austin Hetrick. Otto, a student in the Business School, will bring a marketing perspective to the ASM Press Office. Hetrick has most recently served as a policy intern at Smoke-Free Wisconsin. Using new social media strategies such as blogs, Twitter, and Facebook, Hetrick helped successfully push for a statewide smoke-free public as part of the 2009-2011 state budget.

Some insider press credentials will give him authority when it comes to the grunt work of calling up papers, contacting bloggers, and writing press releases. The unanswered question: will a staff with 3 employees and thousands of dollars come up with creative PR strategies or just become a glorified press release machine in the coming year?

In my personal opinion, last year was a very small step forward for the press office. Small. We’re talking incredibly incremental. They wrote some press releases and established some legitimacy for an office to exist. But not much else. Very little substantial work outside of the website development and numerous botched releases. That’s unacceptable.

Only time will tell what Mr. Harris can do in his leadership position.

No comment ad nauseum.

A city attorney’s investigation, which included review of a videotape of a July 7 council meeting and interviews with witnesses, found little to no evidence to substantiate the claim against Bruer.

Instead, the report concluded, “The relationship between certain individuals in the clerk’s office and City Council office have produced an undesirable working environment that is now having a direct and substantial impact upon the city’s ability to do the public’s business in a professional and expeditious manner.”

The report, prepared by assistant attorney Roger Allen and dated July 10, offers no specifics. The meeting tape was not available on the Madison City Channel Web site late this week.

Bruer maintained he did nothing wrong and said, “This is not about offensive or objectionable behavior. This is about a deliberate attempt to neutralize council leadership and others’ efforts to take action to rectify and respond to mounting concerns about a meltdown of performance and operations and the toxic atmosphere of the clerk’s office.”

The problems, Bruer said, range from the handling of committee responsibilities to liquor license notifications to running out of election ballots.

“There is absolutely no question I and a number of others including the mayor’s office, department heads and city personnel have increasing concerns about the professionalism and performance of the clerk’s office,” Bruer said.

Other city officials are refusing comment, citing “personnel matters.”

“We’ve had a policy of not commenting on issues like this,” said Rachel Strauch-Nelson, spokesperson for Mayor Dave Cieslewicz.

City Clerk Maribeth Witzel-Behl did not return phone calls.

Tammy Peters, who works at council meetings for the clerk’s office and made the complaint against Bruer, declined comment.

Allen could not be reached and City Attorney Michael May declined comment.

Every year, something new:

All men’s basketball student season tickets will be sold as half-season packages in 2009-10. The 19-game home schedule will be split into two separate half-season packages. A total of 2,100 tickets will be available to students in each half-season package. Students will have the flexibility to select the half-season package they wish to purchase, subject to availability. Students will be allowed to purchase only one ticket for one half-season package, while supplies last.

Every year it’s like clock work. Princeton Review (not affiliated with the stuffy conservative school in Jersey) issues a set of rankings – the “cooler” version of the US News – with the party topic as the most notable. This year, Penn State “wins” the honor.

And, of course, the media LOVES to cover the subject.

Some schools love the coverage of this sham. Hey, whatever works, right?

The methodology is a set of questions answered by students, but do you *really* think the school that studies the most (Cal Tech this year) changes year by year?

Or is Princeton Review just trying to capitalize on America’s obsession with winning, rankings, and post-secondary education…