 |
| Ricardo Baco |
Last month The Denver Post announced that Ricardo Baco would be its first marijuana editor ever. Baco and The Denver Post have both received significant amounts of media attention for introducing the role of an editor for something as controversial as marijuana. Baco's new role is largely because Colorado will legalize the sale of recreational marijuana beginning on Jan. 1.
While marijuana once was, and still is, quite taboo, do you think Baco's new role will lead to more tolerance towards recreational marijuana; do you think that marijuana will become legalized throughout the U.S. someday? Will other newspapers will follow suit in naming a marijuana editor? Is Baco's role of marijuana editor indicative of a trend that there will be more specialized editors in the years to come?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/09/business/media/quips-follow-denver-posts-naming-of-marijuana-editor-but-its-intent-is-serious.html?hp
7 comments:
At first, I didn't understand why there would be a need for a "marijuana editor" in specific. After reading the article though, I sort of get it. They're gonna cover policies, culture, recipes, and everything, which, on one hand, actually sounds really interesting. On the other hand, though, it seems like they're making a big deal out of nothing. I don't think it's necessary for them to cover marijuana so extensively - I think they just want more readers. (It's really awesome and hilarious though that they're going to have a job that is literally just "pot critic.")
I do think that Baco's position will create more tolerance towards marijuana. He's approaching the job very seriously and maturely, and I think that in turn will make critics view the drug more maturely.
I think it'd be interesting to see if there will be more specialized editors in the future. It would be interesting if, as pressing issues arose, specific editors would be appointed for certain topics.
Regardless of whether or not marijuana is significant enough to warrant The Denver Post to dedicate an editor to it, it is certainly a strategic move by the newspaper. Marijuana is no longer a taboo in more liberal states, and the first adopters to start discussing in a publication that reaches a significant population will enjoy a significant advantage. In addition to the obvious notoriety and support among the younger generation, the newspaper will be seen as more left than before - an advantage if Colorado continues its Democratic trend. And if marijuana legalization gains traction in national politics, possibly being endorsed by a party, this could be the start of "Marijuana politics."
This specialized editor, although interesting and needed due to the new market for legal marijuana, will only drive a bigger wedge between the liberal and conservative in the US. Like Kevin said, this is a strategic move by the newspaper given the new legalization of marijuana, but the right wing Americans have not gone over that mountain to start accepting the fact that such a controversial drug is now getting less and less criminalized. Eventually, they will accept it, but in this early stage, the conservative coalition in the US may only get mad at the fact that marijuana is now so accepted among about half the US.
It is kind of hilarious that they're going to have a "pot critic" though, like Julia said,
If feel like The Denver Post is creating a marijuana editor in an attempt to achieve more publicity and possible more viewers. I do not believe that marijuana will be able to become legal for recreational use any time in the near future. I feel that too many people see marijuana as taboo and would not like to see it legalized in their states.
I happen to take the side that as Julia said, "they are making a big deal out of nothing." I understand that this is a political move to increase support for the legalization of marijuana by using the media to rally support. However, as we've learned from our gov course, media doesn't have a huge influence on issues the public already has strong feelings about. Like Lorenz stated, most people who are against legalization, are strictly against it. Simply talking about a drug in a more "mature" way would not sway public opinion by much. Even if this tactic is successful, it will probably take a long time before we can see clear results of public opinion shifting.
When I imagine other publications creating specialized editors, I can only see them covering specific issues of large controversy. Again, the media isn't successful at influencing public opinion about well-understood issues. If delegating specialized editors is a political move, I'm not too sure if it'd be a very smart one.
Damn this guy probably has the best freaking job in the world. Where was this guy at the career fair? But really, I don't think that this is making a big deal out of nothing as others have said. I actually think that pot legalization in Colorado is a huge deal: a state passed legislation contrary to federal law. That's pretty monumental, and I think that the trend will continue as more and more states decriminalize or legalize marijuana.
Besides teaching AP Gov at Aragon high school, this guy has the coolest job ever. This guy is getting paid to critic marijuana, and as Julia said, this is so unnecessary. I see this as another step towards the legalization of Marijuana at a federal level. Now Marijuana has an influence in the news people read daily. Maybe one day there will be a Television channel for "potheads" (besides Adult Swim on cartoon network). Marijuana is slowly moving towards being legal, the country of Uruguay has legalized it fully already. Now in Uruguay there is no war on weed (Cocaine and other drugs are still a problem though, South America problems). I disagree that this is not a big deal, its a pretty big deal actually, Marijuana is in the media now and not in a negative way.
Post a Comment