You probably might guess that people who work in a newsroom can be a cynical lot. The daily stream of the stories that come across our desks is usually more negative than not. To say that our humor can be dark at times would be a serious understatement. To a first time visitor who might catch us at less than our best behavior, we might well come off as a pretty jaded bunch.

But then there is a day like today. A big story breaks in the afternoon as word comes in that a commercial jetliner has crashed in the Hudson River down in New York City. One side of your brain begins to process the steps needed to get the pictures into our building, people in the right places to cover the story, and the get the details on the air. (And we aren't even in NYC, but two hours away.)

The other side of your brain briefly processes the possible outcomes. And let's face facts, when you hear the words airliner and crash in the same headline, those outcomes aren't usually good ones.

So imagine the thoughts that pop up when we see those first images, along with you, that a Airbus A320 has been apparently set down on the water, intact and people are being rescued by the growing armada of boats that are pulling up along side of the aircraft that is not sinking as fast as you think it would be.

As the first minutes have turned into the hours since those first reports, the news is thankfully all good. Every one of the 155 on board got out with only a few scattered minor injuries. And the Captain who made the split-second decision to "ditch" US Airways Flight 1549 into the cold waters of the Hudson River is rightly being called a hero.

It is the kind of story that makes even the most cynical news person genuinely smile and be a little more positive about the world we live in.

As the new week begins, the final hours of the campaigns on the national, state and local levels will unfold and then beginning on Tuesday morning, it will be your turn to help write the final chapter of Campaign 2008.

That would be those of you who are over age 18, and have registered to vote.

Despite all of the punditry, predictions and polling--there is no speculation about what may be the most important tally on election night--the percentage of people who will actually exercise their right to go to the polls and cast a vote.

In the 2004 election, the percentage of eligible voters who turned out in the United States was approximately 64%, up from the 60% who did so in the 2000 election. While it is good that the number of voters making their way to their respective polling places is on the rise--it should be noted that percentage is still below many other countries that turn out 70, 80 or even over 90 percent of their electorate for a national election.

Connecticut can be proud of the fact that it usually has a turnout of voters higher than the national average. But wouldn't it be great if in 2008, the voter turnout was the highest ever? What a remarkable moment in history it would be if we had the highest percentage of voter turnout from any other state, or even any other nation?

To encourage you to get that little "I Voted" sticker, Starbucks is offering free coffee to those who come into one of their stores after exercising their right to vote. Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream is offering a free scoop to voters on election day. While nice gestures on those companies part to encourage turnout--should you really have to be "incentivized" to exercise your constitutional right to vote?

So whether or not it is the free coffee or just a sense of doing what you can to support our democracy--please do your part and get out there--and vote on election day.

(Shameless plug alert: Of course, if you'd like to watch your vote count--please join us on Tuesday night as we bring you complete coverage from ABC News and our News Channel 8 team for live returns of Vote 2008.)

It has become somewhat routine that the day after severe weather coverage that interrupts our normal programming, my email program's inbox will be filled with comments about what we did and how we did it. Going home last night, I was thinking about the decision to stay on the air with coverage of the Tornado Warnings in southern Connecticut until they ended and push back our 6:30 and 7pm airings of ABC's "World News" and Jeopardy. I knew pretty much that I could count on that routine for this Friday.

And so when I arrived for work this morning, I began reading a list of emails sent to our Viewer Feedback feature on WTNH.com It then occurred to me that I should share some of these with you, so you can agree or disagree with the sentiments of others who chose to let us know their feelings about

Read more »

Some 24 hours after the first word of the sudden passing of NBC News journalist Tim Russert, it is still hard to believe that he is gone. The tributes that have poured out for Russert, the long time leader of NBC News in Washington and host of "Meet The Press", are so profound and eloquent that it doesn't make much sense to try and add more here about the man and what he meant to both journalism and politics in America. Our condolences go out to his family, friends and colleagues who are struggling to cope with such a sudden and profound loss.

I never met Mr. Russert, but consider myself to be a great fan of his work--as pretty much anyone even slightly interested in politics would have to be. One thing I do know is part of what made him so good at his job--in that he never forgot where he came from. Having spent a few years of my life in his home town of Buffalo, New York, where politics is a close second as a full contact sport to a Buffalo Bills game, part of what made Russert such a great interviewer is that he always asked the questions that the folks back in Buffalo wanted to know the answers to. And like those good people, Tim Russert didn't settle for the standard obfuscation or parroting of the party line that is the usual fare of Washington, DC.

In his last broadcast on Friday, an interview over Washington radio station WTOP, Russert said about the 2008 Presidential race: "there has never been a more interesting, more important presidential election in my lifetime." The fact that we will have to go through it without the contributions of Tim Russert is a loss to everyone who cares even a little about the process of picking the next leader of our nation.

It's my opinion that the very least that every journalist who will cover this election can do, is try to make sure that we get the answers to the important questions that the people of Buffalo-and all the rest of our country-want the answers to. That would be one way that the legacy of Tim Russert can--and should be honored.

This Sunday is an important anniversary for those of us who work here at News Channel 8. On June 15, 1948--the first regular television broadcasts to originate in Connecticut began on Channel 6. What was then known as WNHC-TV began life as an extension of the radio stations with the same name and as an affiliate of the DuMont television network. It was almost the first station to make it on the air north of New York City (Boston's WBZ-TV beat us out by just six days!)

It would be five years before WNHC moved to its current home of Channel 8 in 1953 and not until 1971 before we would get our current name of WTNH. Since that day in 1948, there have been more "firsts" in Connecticut television here than on any other station--and a lot of memories for those of you who have been watching for any or all of the past six decades.

As we head towards the next sixty years, we wanted to take a moment to thank you for watching WTNH--both on the air and now on the internet--and to ask you to take a moment to share any of your memories of being a Channel 8 viewer. Just click on the comments link below and share them here with us.

It's always a thrill when you are recognized by others for your hard work, and five of our staffers got to experience that thrill for themselves by winning an Emmy at the 31st Boston / New England Emmy Awards ceremony this past Saturday night.

Read more »

With the President visiting our state, there have already been a couple of calls to complain that we addressed the President as "Mr. Bush", and that somehow is meant to show some disrespect on our part for the Commander-In-Chief.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The practice is that the President is usually addressed by title in the first reference to the person or the office. So in the case of our reporting, you'll first hear us say either "President Bush" or "The President". But it is appropriate on following references to address him as "Mister Bush". That usage has been in place since the founding fathers of our country wanted to make it clear that the title of President is not one of royalty, and that the holder of the office is still one of the people.

This convention has been followed ever since Mr. Washington held the office as the first person to do so. We'll continue to follow this practice in the future and assure you that there is no disrespect, either intended or implied, in doing so.

The morning after the Democratic primary in my native state of South Carolina deserves a little recognition and reflection, I think. Though I have been living in the Northeastern US for the past 25 years or so, the majority of that period here in my adopted home of Connecticut, I grew up in a South Carolina that struggled with the dawn of the civil rights era. It was a state that continued to send a once-avowed segregationist to the US Senate (Strom Thurmond) until 2003--though he had long since tempered the racial views that he had once run for the presidency on.

So politics aside for the moment, the simple fact that an African American man dominated his party's presidential primary in South Carolina yesterday is something to reflect on, as I see it. The fact that he did this against a woman running for the same office makes it even a more historical moment in both that state's history and yes, our growth as a nation.

Read more »