... and some skepticism.

I can't stand the idea that the kids are "studying" journalism without a scintilla of curiosity about how so-called journalism is demonstrated out there. If I were the teacher, I'd have the kids each bring in a provocative article each week to discuss.

what the media considers "investigative reporting" ...

I took a journalism class in the 7th grade as well and we were required to independently find stories from 3 different types of sources every week. I still read the paper and watch the news everyday after taking that class. They should revamp their curriculum. It's a scary thought that students could be taught journalism without really delving into journalism.

about 'on line' news. With a paper, it's there, it's readable. On line you have to go tot he website, download and read it on a screen that's usually much smaller than a paper. I'm not surprised younger people don't read newspapers. Which means they aren't really informed and can by prey to manipulation...........

tv and radio news in the U.S. is a plus.

Journalism students should, of course, be immersed in a wide variety of news sources. The only reason I see to watch news on American tv or listen to it on the radio is to analyze examples of bad journalism.

It's always been that way because kids typically don't think a lot outside of their immediate experience until high school.

It has everything to do with child development and forming abstract thoughts.

What I am concerned about are people who post on DU and other places who think newspapers are dead, hard copy books are dead because renting "ebooks" is better than actually OWNING an author's book, and actually think blogs provide news.

THAT is what is scary.

People don't subscribe to newspapers anymore. They don't read for pleasure as much as they used to. Cable TV means there are hundreds channels with programming which is mind numbing for the most part. Kids are allowed to play video games for hours.