New feature: Young people who inspire

If you spend any time with young people, you know that the best among them don't always get the attention they deserve.

This is especially true in the media's coverage of the daily news.

It shouldn't be that way. News, by definition, is what's extraordinary to our readers. And when young people achieve remarkable accomplishments, that is extraordinarily good news.

The Observer has long valued this news. It's why each spring we honor more than 100 of the region's top students as Observer All-Star Scholars. It's also why we've been proud to sponsor the Charlotte Observer Regional Spelling Bee for 57 years.

On Tuesday, we introduce another way to mark the accomplishments of young people with a new feature called Young Achievers.

Each week, we will bring you news and insightful profiles of young people in our region who are excelling in academics, the arts, public service and a variety of other settings that are richer because of their involvement.

On Tuesday, for instance, you will meet Manasvi Koul. Manasvi's personal battle with a potentially fatal illness motivated her to raise more than $500,000 in support of other sick children while she was still a high school student in Union County.

Young Achievers will appear in our printed edition as two full-color pages inside our Carolina Living section. Online, you will find that content, plus videos, photo slideshows, archives and the means to share your own stories about inspiring young people.

Some readers may be surprised to see added community coverage in an era when the trend has been for most news media to cut back.

This is possible through a new funding model the Observer is developing for coverage that you would welcome. Under this approach, we find a company, foundation or individual willing to underwrite the cost of high-quality content as an important investment in the life of its community.

Similar to underwriters of content on NPR and PBS, our underwriters play no role in the selection or editing of the content. But their support is a high-profile commitment to coverage that is good for our region.

This is how we are able to bring you our widely acclaimed Sci-Tech section each Monday. Its exclusive coverage of advances in science and technology across the Carolinas is underwritten by Duke Energy.

For Young Achievers, we found another willing underwriter: Piedmont Natural Gas.

"We see this as a wonderful opportunity to recognize the accomplishments of young people throughout our community and to show appreciation for the contributions they are making, not only in their own lives but in the lives of others," said Thomas Skains, Piedmont's chairman, president, and CEO. "I have no doubt that the talents, energy, and passion represented . . . will be as impressive as they are inspirational to us all."

Of course, there are many more young people deserving of recognition than we can mention in any weekly package. So this coverage is in addition to ongoing schools and youth-oriented features you find now in our community sections and daily news coverage. Many of those features also invite you to submit an idea or an item for publication.

Our goal is that, with your help, we will leave no significant achievement unrecognized.

I think you will be touched and encouraged by what you read. These are remarkable individuals. To know them through their personal experiences is to appreciate all the more how far they have come already in such young lives.


-- Reach Rick Thames at rthames@charlotteobserver.com, twitter.com/rthames and www.facebook.com/rthames.obs. Phone: 704-358-5001.

Reader: Don't pick candidates for us!

Q: Why do the media believe it is their right to pre-select a field of acceptable candidates for their readership?"
The reason I ask this is that . . . you have published two articles about the decisions of two "candidates" to NOT run. The article about (Mike) Huckabee mentions no fewer than eight other candidates (or non-candidates): Romney, Gingrich, Bachmann, Daniels, Pawlenty, Palin, Santorum, Trump. The (Donald) Trump piece mentions Romney, Gingrich, Bachmann, Daniels, Pawlenty,and Huckabee. Missing from the articles are the man who some believe "won" the first debate (Herman Cain), the man who many others believe won that debate(Ron Paul) . . , and a man who has twice the executive experience of Mitt Romney (Gary Johnson, twice elected governor of New Mexico). (A recent) editorial once again omitted Gary Johnson and Ron Paul (it did name-check Herman Cain). This follows a tragic precedent set by the Observer and its affiliated wire services in 2008 to exclude certain candidates from mention in its election coverage. Why are you staggering down the same pathetic path this year?

Hilton Caldwell, Monroe

A: Hilton, I agree that there has been little consistency to this point in our reporting on the potential field of GOP candidates. That's partly because of the uncertainty about who is in and who is out. The Gallup polling organization, in an effort to make sense of this fluid field, has been tracking 15 names. Potential candidates now officially announce or excuse themselves almost daily. But that will change as the field firms up. For now, candidates who have announced and are drawing a following certainly should be acknowledged in coverage. So, I think you make a very good point about Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, both of whom have announced they are running. You may have seen that we carried an article about Herman Cain announcing in Atlanta over the weekend. Others who have announced include Newt Gingrich and Tim Pawlenty. I’ve shared your concerns internally with our staff and we will work to provide more complete references to the field of potential candidates. This is an issue that matters a great deal to us. We think voters should decide which candidates are to be taken seriously, not the press, not political parties, not special interests. As the campaign progresses, we will also watch carefully to see which candidates are resonating with voters and which are being generally discounted. It would be unwise to focus on a candidate simply because he or she has gotten on the ballot. If the public has clearly heard a candidate and largely rejected that person, voters are better off if the media uses more of its resources, instead, to cover viable candidates. Thanks for the question.