The 'P' Word
Too bad Joe Merrill. I can understand the mentality to justify lifting quotes without proper attribution. Harmless. You would expect that the source you are using upholds journalism ethics much better than yourself. However, in the end the gossip'esque evolution of news should deter the most apathetic journalist. We are living in a time surrounded by hidden truths. Writers must remember that the public deserves at least one reliable source of news.
I thought it was really typical that Merrill became the topic of internet blogging. When policy is broken consequences should result. However, is Merrill's life open to public forum? I suppose, considering Merrill writes about others as a profession.
In the end, the public deserves to know where information comes from.
Jeo Merrill's Response
The fact that Merrill is an 83-year-old man kinda makes me sympathize. By now Merrill has a devoted audience, whose credibility judgment may not be swayed. He should not have been canned, in my opinion. His response was eloquent, avoiding squabble. I empathize with Merrill's intent, confident he did not believe he was doing anything wrong.
However, who knows anyone's true intent? There is not way to prove Merrill did not mean harm.. did not deliberately withhold information to cover up his now old and lethargic reporting skills.
Public Information
I constantly find myself musing scandalous investigative pieces, however do not know where to start. The list of places to start really fascinated me. I did not like how a majority of the websites required some sort of registration fee or credit card number. By requiring a fee, public information becomes selective, advantageous, restrictive. I was a bit intimidated by the website regarding US Contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. The fact that people are organizing such information makes me realize the gravity of the Contractor situation. I also enjoyed playing around with one database that organizes candidate donors based on zip code. Obama seems to be collecting the majority of donations from my hometown.
interesting tidbit, related or unrelated to journalism, that I picked up in a speech path class today:
studies suggest that 77% of Americans, at any given time, are unhappy
Journalistic Coverage of Politics
The Media and Its Infatuation With Polls
Straw poll, Iowa caucus polls, New Hampshire primary polls... I do not know what any relevance polls have on the presidential nomination election, however I do know that the media loves to discuss polls and show statistics. Polls generally question voters who regurgitate what they see in the news, which is typically personal news and campaign financing. Voters questioned base their answers on information nearly irrelevant to the campaign itself.
The Nation analyzed the 2007 media campaign coverage, and 63 percent covered polls and finances and 17 percent of coverage was personal issues. Only 12 percent of coverage followed how voters would be affected by the election.
Why does the media continue to fuel the epidemic of ill informed voters?
On December 10, 2007 the top story on the NYTimes politics section was: Poll Finds G.O.P. Field Isn’t Touching Voters
As the media prints the 'opinion' of American voters, the media influences any fickle person who is in search of what they should think. Without having the NYTimes print on the front page that Republicans are not happy with the candidate options, I could have told you Republicans are disgruntled. As the media prints who is leading in polls, those who are not leading become lost in the brouhaha that is Hillary's and Obama's social life.
Maybe the media prints political nonsense to remain objective, if that is the case then I denounce objectivity. There needs to be coverage on how politicians plan to solve the problems plaguing this world. There needs to be coverage on Congress so the public can come together to push ahead towards progress.
I've been writing this response over the course of several days and realize the coverage of political figures is not the problem with political media coverage. The problem is that local politics are forever diminished by the shadow cast by federal media sensationalism. Federal level Bipartison turmoil polarizes and desensitizes the public... Nothing can be changed at the federal level. If a greater media emphasis was placed on the workings of local politics, the public will be able to organize a grassroots movement. The problem is that the public regards these representatives and senators as demigods. Yes sometimes local politics can be quiet... or is that because no one is reporting the deceptive under workings of the town councilmen that just cemented his new driveway??
My point is, as the media conglomerate grew, it inevitably grew away from the local public.
I'm not sure how to find a website to emphasis my last point, however, just compare the size of political content in The Buffalo News vs The New York Times
Monday, December 10, 2007
Monday, December 3, 2007
I agree with Joe Weiss when he says that still photos have a rememberance quality. Some stories can easily be shown via audio slideshow or video, and either medium equally affect viewers. However, sometimes still photos are able to consume a viewer better than video. We are living in a video world. When a viewer is asked to slow down and really focus on a visual and accompanying audio a deeper message can be conveyed.
Weiss almost makes the point that some audio slideshows are just too long. He says that photojournalists produce portfolios with only 30 photographs, how can a 3 min slideshow have 30 effective and efficient photos?
When making my soundslideshow I will make sure to focus on my audio storytelling and accompany my audio with photos that work with and also move with story along.
Mitt Romney and Faith in America
Well Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney has decided to address his Mormon faith on Thursday in Texas. Whenever I hear religion mentioned in politics I cringe. There is no absolutely NO reason to bring up religion or clarify religion or justify religion. You believe what you believe, and I will be believe what I want to believe. The Evangelical Christian movement frightens me more than elected a Mormon into office. I do not really understand the strength of the Mormon Church in politics, however the evangelicals could potentially take over America and eventually the world. I am scared that if the evangelicals get a jump start in the early primaries and caucus' the separation of church and state will no longer exist... that rights I should be guarenteed as a women will be denied... that some faith I do not share will bombard my life.
Weiss almost makes the point that some audio slideshows are just too long. He says that photojournalists produce portfolios with only 30 photographs, how can a 3 min slideshow have 30 effective and efficient photos?
When making my soundslideshow I will make sure to focus on my audio storytelling and accompany my audio with photos that work with and also move with story along.
Mitt Romney and Faith in America
Well Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney has decided to address his Mormon faith on Thursday in Texas. Whenever I hear religion mentioned in politics I cringe. There is no absolutely NO reason to bring up religion or clarify religion or justify religion. You believe what you believe, and I will be believe what I want to believe. The Evangelical Christian movement frightens me more than elected a Mormon into office. I do not really understand the strength of the Mormon Church in politics, however the evangelicals could potentially take over America and eventually the world. I am scared that if the evangelicals get a jump start in the early primaries and caucus' the separation of church and state will no longer exist... that rights I should be guarenteed as a women will be denied... that some faith I do not share will bombard my life.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Text:
"Poytn(me)r in the right direction"
Ethics of Journalism.. a topic I have problems with.
Most issues involving ethics are focused on how the readers and financial investors are affected. When it comes to media junkets and freebes I personally would have no problem accepting gifts. Just because a company treated me to a nice island vacation to report on the tourist economy in the Virgin Islands does not mean that I will not write a bad report. If journalists allow gifts and opportunities to alter their objectivity, then yes credibility becomes an issue. I follow a more teleological approach to ethics. If the story is factual, accurate and objective... what does it matter how you went about obtaining the story? Conversations with journalists regarding ethics makes me cringe. In my mind I see a bunch of scholars, too lazy to make it in the reporting world, chastising real writers over unobtainable dimensions of objectivity.
Since the present media takes form as a corporate conglomerate, how can a journalist be criticized for buying and interview or receiving a free cup of joe?
I have studied several approaches to resolving ethical problems that arise in journalism. Most methods require involved analysis and other feather in your cap macaroni type of processes... When a journalist is on the job working on deadline.. issues arise and the journalist does not have time to puff on a cuban and discuss over a brandy.
As my mother often says, "We all shit in the same pot, and in the end it all smells the same." Journalism ethicists can toil over the guidelines of credibility.. I choose the right to accept vacations and dinners.
Website reading:
Basically what I took away from the additional reading was optimism. Journalism is not just print anymore. Journalism does not require words. In my mind, journalism isn't even 'new' news. Journalism is spreading the word, telling others what they have the right to know. All this professionalism yadda yadda makes me cringe. Spread the word spread the knowledge.
I like the idea of online news competing with television. The Anna Nicole Smith 24-7 coverage last year on most major news networks justifies the rise of online news.
I checked out some of the animated news links. I really wish I knew flash or some other animation program to work with that realm of journalism. I feel that jumping on the news junkie bandwagon is difficult these days and ill-informed. Online news provides readers with an opportunity to understand the history of the war in Iraq or even a visual of how a hurricane forms.
Although there will always be critics of journalist practices.. I feel that at the rate journalism is changing, those old bourbon swirling farts won't be able to keep up.
Election:
GOP and the Media
Well new polls are in and Ron Paul looks to be in fourth place in the New Hampshire primary. The Nation suggests that if Paul received equal media representation then he might become a serious national contender for the GOP candidacy. I recognize the name Ron Paul and associate him with libertarian values, however I do not know much about his policy beyond that. I went to check out NYTimes politics page on the candidates, and in the right corner there are faces of GOP and Democrat candidates. I understand that the Times cannot put every candidate on the opening page, and I assumed the candidates were chosen based on alphabetical order. Not the case, Thompson's name appeared but not Paul. Although my quick net surfing is a large generalization, but it proves my point. The media is doing a horrible job reporting on the candidates. Guiliani appears in countless headlines from New Hampshire, even though he has basically said that he is not focusing much of his campaign on the early primaries.
Consider even the coverage between Thompson and Paul. Thompson is not contending well in NH and his only claim to fame is Law and Order. I also know that Thompson has a fairly young wife and lost a daughter some years ago. Why do I know these things, yet know nothing about Paul? I think the answer is that Paul does not care to play these personal issues during the campaign.
"Poytn(me)r in the right direction"
Ethics of Journalism.. a topic I have problems with.
Most issues involving ethics are focused on how the readers and financial investors are affected. When it comes to media junkets and freebes I personally would have no problem accepting gifts. Just because a company treated me to a nice island vacation to report on the tourist economy in the Virgin Islands does not mean that I will not write a bad report. If journalists allow gifts and opportunities to alter their objectivity, then yes credibility becomes an issue. I follow a more teleological approach to ethics. If the story is factual, accurate and objective... what does it matter how you went about obtaining the story? Conversations with journalists regarding ethics makes me cringe. In my mind I see a bunch of scholars, too lazy to make it in the reporting world, chastising real writers over unobtainable dimensions of objectivity.
Since the present media takes form as a corporate conglomerate, how can a journalist be criticized for buying and interview or receiving a free cup of joe?
I have studied several approaches to resolving ethical problems that arise in journalism. Most methods require involved analysis and other feather in your cap macaroni type of processes... When a journalist is on the job working on deadline.. issues arise and the journalist does not have time to puff on a cuban and discuss over a brandy.
As my mother often says, "We all shit in the same pot, and in the end it all smells the same." Journalism ethicists can toil over the guidelines of credibility.. I choose the right to accept vacations and dinners.
Website reading:
Basically what I took away from the additional reading was optimism. Journalism is not just print anymore. Journalism does not require words. In my mind, journalism isn't even 'new' news. Journalism is spreading the word, telling others what they have the right to know. All this professionalism yadda yadda makes me cringe. Spread the word spread the knowledge.
I like the idea of online news competing with television. The Anna Nicole Smith 24-7 coverage last year on most major news networks justifies the rise of online news.
I checked out some of the animated news links. I really wish I knew flash or some other animation program to work with that realm of journalism. I feel that jumping on the news junkie bandwagon is difficult these days and ill-informed. Online news provides readers with an opportunity to understand the history of the war in Iraq or even a visual of how a hurricane forms.
Although there will always be critics of journalist practices.. I feel that at the rate journalism is changing, those old bourbon swirling farts won't be able to keep up.
Election:
GOP and the Media
Well new polls are in and Ron Paul looks to be in fourth place in the New Hampshire primary. The Nation suggests that if Paul received equal media representation then he might become a serious national contender for the GOP candidacy. I recognize the name Ron Paul and associate him with libertarian values, however I do not know much about his policy beyond that. I went to check out NYTimes politics page on the candidates, and in the right corner there are faces of GOP and Democrat candidates. I understand that the Times cannot put every candidate on the opening page, and I assumed the candidates were chosen based on alphabetical order. Not the case, Thompson's name appeared but not Paul. Although my quick net surfing is a large generalization, but it proves my point. The media is doing a horrible job reporting on the candidates. Guiliani appears in countless headlines from New Hampshire, even though he has basically said that he is not focusing much of his campaign on the early primaries.
Consider even the coverage between Thompson and Paul. Thompson is not contending well in NH and his only claim to fame is Law and Order. I also know that Thompson has a fairly young wife and lost a daughter some years ago. Why do I know these things, yet know nothing about Paul? I think the answer is that Paul does not care to play these personal issues during the campaign.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Ch. 19 Radio and Television
Radio and television news needs to be straight forward. Writing must be clear and concise.
I don't have much to say about radio and tv writing/stories, but I can comment on the industry.
The text said that a half hour news cast contains only 22 minutes of news, roughly only half of the front page of print news. I feel a large population of the American people get most of their news from national television broadcasts. If broadcasts are only have time for a small hand full of stories, the public is ill informed. I don't think the people that get their news from tv are inclined to follow up on stories via newspapers.
The topic of agenda setting comes to mind as well. I always have a problem with the idea of top stories. Who says the 4 or 5 stories covered on tv are the most relevant? TV and radio confine the viewer to, in my mind, censored news. Who is to blame, the news station.. the financial supports... the public?
I think that radio is the most objective news source, solely because the radio usually only provides for short updates... making it difficult to find space/time for opinionated interjections.
I think radio script writing should be studied early on in journalism curriculum, because radio stresses the idea of getting to the facts. I have a difficult time determining what is relevant to a story when writing for print. Radio writing would help discern the facts from fillers.
Clinton Gets an Instant Chance to Wield a New Weapon
The NY Times reported that Hillary Clinton launched a website for the sole purpose of disputing news reports her campaign finds offensive. The story cites how Hillary reportedly did not tip a waitress after dining in Iowa.
WHO CARES!?!?!?!
Why are papers even printing that Hillary did not leave a tip (although it was later proven that Hillary did leave a $100 tip for a $157 meal)? Why does the media fuel empty politics?
Politicians need to attack policy not personality.
It is ridiculous that Hillary needs to create a site to disprove news allegations. This might be one of the only times I sympathize with Hillary. However, Hillary should be the better woman and ignore these cheap attacks at her campaign.
Radio and television news needs to be straight forward. Writing must be clear and concise.
I don't have much to say about radio and tv writing/stories, but I can comment on the industry.
The text said that a half hour news cast contains only 22 minutes of news, roughly only half of the front page of print news. I feel a large population of the American people get most of their news from national television broadcasts. If broadcasts are only have time for a small hand full of stories, the public is ill informed. I don't think the people that get their news from tv are inclined to follow up on stories via newspapers.
The topic of agenda setting comes to mind as well. I always have a problem with the idea of top stories. Who says the 4 or 5 stories covered on tv are the most relevant? TV and radio confine the viewer to, in my mind, censored news. Who is to blame, the news station.. the financial supports... the public?
I think that radio is the most objective news source, solely because the radio usually only provides for short updates... making it difficult to find space/time for opinionated interjections.
I think radio script writing should be studied early on in journalism curriculum, because radio stresses the idea of getting to the facts. I have a difficult time determining what is relevant to a story when writing for print. Radio writing would help discern the facts from fillers.
Clinton Gets an Instant Chance to Wield a New Weapon
The NY Times reported that Hillary Clinton launched a website for the sole purpose of disputing news reports her campaign finds offensive. The story cites how Hillary reportedly did not tip a waitress after dining in Iowa.
WHO CARES!?!?!?!
Why are papers even printing that Hillary did not leave a tip (although it was later proven that Hillary did leave a $100 tip for a $157 meal)? Why does the media fuel empty politics?
Politicians need to attack policy not personality.
It is ridiculous that Hillary needs to create a site to disprove news allegations. This might be one of the only times I sympathize with Hillary. However, Hillary should be the better woman and ignore these cheap attacks at her campaign.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Ch. 18
Investigative reporting, now thats what I call journalism. I think its phenomenal the number of social injustices that can be exposed just through a bit of attention and research. I realize there are just as many stories that need more than research to develop into a story.
The one thing that upsets me is that investigative reporting is necessary. Why are people so corrupt? Who are these people that are so willing to exploit the innocent? I've always wanted to help people. I knew that I would only find completion in my life by finding some sort of truth. Investigative reporting provides me with the ability to do just that.
I understand that accuracy is key.. but as the text describes not everyone will tell a report the whole truth. I don't think loyal journalist should be scrutinized so much by frivolous inaccuracies. I think even if facts can't be double checked they can still be printed. As long as it is stated that what you are writing is what someone else said. Yes that may seem like adding to the continuum of rumors.. but I think it provides with the idea to question information for themselves.
Databases. Well I think I am pretty capable of extracting the information I need from the Internet. However I know there are countless websites designed for journalists that I am unfamiliar with.
Accessing public records is something I need to explore.
After looking at the IRE abstracts, I was pleased to see that some reporting actually served as a catalyst to action in the government.
Different Rules When a Rival Is a Woman?
Evidently Hillary Clinton is pulling the gender card, but according to Hillary she isn't. The Clinton campaign thinks that Hillary has been center of Democratic attack because she is a woman. What? People are attacking you Hillary, because people don't like you. It also makes sense that Hillary would be the Democrats number one target, because she is leading the polls. You are topic of discussion Mrs. Hillary Clinton because you say one thing and vote another.
The article also suggested that in America sexism is okay but racism is not, therefore the reason why number two man, Obama, has not been grilled with questions and criticism. Bah. Hillary, you are an easy target, just look at the last weekend's SNL opening skit.
I want to see more political platforms in the news, not petty fights.
Investigative reporting, now thats what I call journalism. I think its phenomenal the number of social injustices that can be exposed just through a bit of attention and research. I realize there are just as many stories that need more than research to develop into a story.
The one thing that upsets me is that investigative reporting is necessary. Why are people so corrupt? Who are these people that are so willing to exploit the innocent? I've always wanted to help people. I knew that I would only find completion in my life by finding some sort of truth. Investigative reporting provides me with the ability to do just that.
I understand that accuracy is key.. but as the text describes not everyone will tell a report the whole truth. I don't think loyal journalist should be scrutinized so much by frivolous inaccuracies. I think even if facts can't be double checked they can still be printed. As long as it is stated that what you are writing is what someone else said. Yes that may seem like adding to the continuum of rumors.. but I think it provides with the idea to question information for themselves.
Databases. Well I think I am pretty capable of extracting the information I need from the Internet. However I know there are countless websites designed for journalists that I am unfamiliar with.
Accessing public records is something I need to explore.
After looking at the IRE abstracts, I was pleased to see that some reporting actually served as a catalyst to action in the government.
Different Rules When a Rival Is a Woman?
Evidently Hillary Clinton is pulling the gender card, but according to Hillary she isn't. The Clinton campaign thinks that Hillary has been center of Democratic attack because she is a woman. What? People are attacking you Hillary, because people don't like you. It also makes sense that Hillary would be the Democrats number one target, because she is leading the polls. You are topic of discussion Mrs. Hillary Clinton because you say one thing and vote another.
The article also suggested that in America sexism is okay but racism is not, therefore the reason why number two man, Obama, has not been grilled with questions and criticism. Bah. Hillary, you are an easy target, just look at the last weekend's SNL opening skit.
I want to see more political platforms in the news, not petty fights.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Beats Me.
Ch. 14
The topic of 'Be Persistent' really consumed me in the text. I must have some undiagnosed social anxiety. I've written before that I just have an overwhelming problem with, basically in my mind, nagging sources for information. As I read on in the chapter about how beat writing is really built upon the fundamentals of source relationships.. it got me thinking.
I started thinking about why I chose to be in the journalism program to begin with. I enjoy writing, although news writing may not be my forte. Secondly I have this nagging conflict with 'the man' and the seemingly willingness of the exploitation of the American people. The people need to know.
So.. I am beginning to convince myself that persistence and meddling is necessary, in the name of the people. I should not wary of calling a political figure, in fear of burdening. My readers desire to know what is going on. I should be relentless until a source finally agrees to talk.
.. I need to remember to be persistent.
The chapter in a nutshell basically stresses doing your research and knowing your sources.
I was apprehensive while reading the section on the religious beat. I didn't feel like the paper should devote a page to religious news. But then as I continued reading I decided that the religion beat might be the most exciting. Personally, organized religion is as corrupt as any level of government.
Ch. 8 and ch. 9
"(Note that the Associated Press stylebook requires its reporters to use the word “innocent, rather than not guilty…to guard against the word ‘not’ being dropped inadvertently.”)"
I do not know how to strive for accuracy, when the news is not reflecting real life because of some poor editing or printing. The concept that the American legal system is designed around determining guilt rather than innocence should be expressed in the news. Who decides such exemptions from accuracy?
I have to admit I do not like pondering whether or not the legal system is democratic. I can vaguely understand why the media can be refused access to trials... and I can vaguely understand the press' right to report fully. Ultimately I am a pessimist and feel that someones rights must be jeopardized. If the legal system wasn't so shady, why leave the public in the dark.
If primetime television can produce so many hit crime-court series, court reporting must be interesting.
Court reporters should be allowed to freely analyze a court stories. More than words can express a defendants guilt. Courts are dramatic scenes, deserving of conservation of such dramatic elements.
Besides reporting on the actions taken place in court, post trial jury interviews seem to be the most exciting. I can imagine that it is difficult to gain interviews to some jurors, I would be scared of death threats if I was a juror for a high profile case. A group of the defendants peers labeled him guilty, that is an interesting story to understand from the personal level.
I feel that if reason for divorce is public information, settlement should be public as well. How can the press make sure the courts are working legally, if climax is withheld?
Hit Me With Your Best Shot
"Added Huckabee, warning of the coming entitlement crisis in Medicare and Social Security: "I just want to remind everybody when all the old hippies find out that they get free drugs, just wait until what that's going to cost out there."" - FOX REPUBLICAN DEBATE
Who says that? Who says that on national television? Who says that when running for president?
I stumbled upon the Republican debate Oct. 21 and decided to tune in. I've been putting off my candidate research and was pleasantly surprised to see Mr. Giuliani on my television screen. However once the candidates opened their mouths I was so embaressed for them I had to change the channel. I did not learn anything about what the candidates platforms are. All I heard was Hillary Clinton bashes. Huckabee's earlier statement makes me cringe even now. I can understand not being in favor of socialized health care.. however talk like an intelligent leader.. don't try and win the yokles votes by saying rubbish like that.
I salute McCain for a comment he made about Hillary supported the building of a Woodstock museum. McCain said he was to busy fight a war to know what was going on in Woodstock. Cheap topic to bring up.. but an A+ for handling the question and response.
My problem is that no one seems to be questioning the integrity of the party candidates. Stop bashing one another and tell me what you represent. Tell me what you believe. Let me decide!
The topic of 'Be Persistent' really consumed me in the text. I must have some undiagnosed social anxiety. I've written before that I just have an overwhelming problem with, basically in my mind, nagging sources for information. As I read on in the chapter about how beat writing is really built upon the fundamentals of source relationships.. it got me thinking.
I started thinking about why I chose to be in the journalism program to begin with. I enjoy writing, although news writing may not be my forte. Secondly I have this nagging conflict with 'the man' and the seemingly willingness of the exploitation of the American people. The people need to know.
So.. I am beginning to convince myself that persistence and meddling is necessary, in the name of the people. I should not wary of calling a political figure, in fear of burdening. My readers desire to know what is going on. I should be relentless until a source finally agrees to talk.
.. I need to remember to be persistent.
The chapter in a nutshell basically stresses doing your research and knowing your sources.
I was apprehensive while reading the section on the religious beat. I didn't feel like the paper should devote a page to religious news. But then as I continued reading I decided that the religion beat might be the most exciting. Personally, organized religion is as corrupt as any level of government.
Ch. 8 and ch. 9
"(Note that the Associated Press stylebook requires its reporters to use the word “innocent, rather than not guilty…to guard against the word ‘not’ being dropped inadvertently.”)"
I do not know how to strive for accuracy, when the news is not reflecting real life because of some poor editing or printing. The concept that the American legal system is designed around determining guilt rather than innocence should be expressed in the news. Who decides such exemptions from accuracy?
I have to admit I do not like pondering whether or not the legal system is democratic. I can vaguely understand why the media can be refused access to trials... and I can vaguely understand the press' right to report fully. Ultimately I am a pessimist and feel that someones rights must be jeopardized. If the legal system wasn't so shady, why leave the public in the dark.
If primetime television can produce so many hit crime-court series, court reporting must be interesting.
Court reporters should be allowed to freely analyze a court stories. More than words can express a defendants guilt. Courts are dramatic scenes, deserving of conservation of such dramatic elements.
Besides reporting on the actions taken place in court, post trial jury interviews seem to be the most exciting. I can imagine that it is difficult to gain interviews to some jurors, I would be scared of death threats if I was a juror for a high profile case. A group of the defendants peers labeled him guilty, that is an interesting story to understand from the personal level.
I feel that if reason for divorce is public information, settlement should be public as well. How can the press make sure the courts are working legally, if climax is withheld?
Hit Me With Your Best Shot
"Added Huckabee, warning of the coming entitlement crisis in Medicare and Social Security: "I just want to remind everybody when all the old hippies find out that they get free drugs, just wait until what that's going to cost out there."" - FOX REPUBLICAN DEBATE
Who says that? Who says that on national television? Who says that when running for president?
I stumbled upon the Republican debate Oct. 21 and decided to tune in. I've been putting off my candidate research and was pleasantly surprised to see Mr. Giuliani on my television screen. However once the candidates opened their mouths I was so embaressed for them I had to change the channel. I did not learn anything about what the candidates platforms are. All I heard was Hillary Clinton bashes. Huckabee's earlier statement makes me cringe even now. I can understand not being in favor of socialized health care.. however talk like an intelligent leader.. don't try and win the yokles votes by saying rubbish like that.
I salute McCain for a comment he made about Hillary supported the building of a Woodstock museum. McCain said he was to busy fight a war to know what was going on in Woodstock. Cheap topic to bring up.. but an A+ for handling the question and response.
My problem is that no one seems to be questioning the integrity of the party candidates. Stop bashing one another and tell me what you represent. Tell me what you believe. Let me decide!
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Blog URLs
http://bryannews1.blogspot.com/2007/10/mccains-old.html -- McCain's Old
http://newsreporting1.blogspot.com/2007/09/obama-and-oprah.html --- Obama and Oprah
http://flongit.blogspot.com/2007/09/expect-expectorating.html -- Expect Expectorating/Patraeus
http://pierulesyou.blogspot.com/2007/09/yahoo-message-boards.html -- Yahoo! message boards
http://lauraswanson.blogspot.com/2007/09/obamania.html -- Obamania
http://devonhaley.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-just-read-article-on-caucus-new-york.html -- Republican No Show
http://brianaword.blogspot.com/2007/09/those-newfangled-webcast-thingies.html -- Newfangled Webcast Thingies
http://6078287.blogspot.com/2007/10/i-got-momentarily-and-unnecessarily.html -- Romney 'one of us'
http://newsreporting1.blogspot.com/2007/09/obama-and-oprah.html --- Obama and Oprah
http://flongit.blogspot.com/2007/09/expect-expectorating.html -- Expect Expectorating/Patraeus
http://pierulesyou.blogspot.com/2007/09/yahoo-message-boards.html -- Yahoo! message boards
http://lauraswanson.blogspot.com/2007/09/obamania.html -- Obamania
http://devonhaley.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-just-read-article-on-caucus-new-york.html -- Republican No Show
http://brianaword.blogspot.com/2007/09/those-newfangled-webcast-thingies.html -- Newfangled Webcast Thingies
http://6078287.blogspot.com/2007/10/i-got-momentarily-and-unnecessarily.html -- Romney 'one of us'
Monday, October 22, 2007
Covering Crime and Justice
One:
Post-traumatic stress disorder, death threats, homicide, and crooked cops.. Boy oh Boy Dave Krajicek certainly sold me to crime beat reporting. In all honesty covering the crime beat actually seems fulfilling to me. Change starts somewhere, why not through covering corruption? Crime exists, crime is real.. it needs to be reported. Krajicek mentions something about how critics feel that a couple sentences debriefing on how typically the reported crime is in general should be included in a report. I can understand objections. However approaching crime reporting on a holistic level makes sense. Instead of reporting on the bad depressing aspects of the crime news, (isn't that all news not just crime beats?) investigate on trends and how crime effects the public at large.
Crime beat reporters don't appear to have many friends. If editors even clash with reporters, what is the problem. Who wants to read just the hard facts of a sexual assault? I can understand summarizing lead crimes, however the big picture should not be ignored. Maybe I my image of journalism is to involved. I want to write stories that mean something to people. I want people to be informed. I want people to know how to change their world and why it needs to be changed. I don't just want to write about a homicide.. I want to write about why homocides continue to occur in certain areas and how to prevent further homicides. But then again we are just talking about crime beats not feature stories. I surprise myself in saying that I might like crime beats. Mix in a little investigative reporting and crime beats... well I might just be prepared to tackle the organized crime that fronts as garbage collection.
Five:
note to self: "Never forget it's not our job to judge, only to tell the truth through reporting and writing."
A problem I have is that I don't like to be obtrusive. I've never been placed in the situation.. but I can guarentee that I will have a difficult time calling a victim or family member of a victim.. and then calling again and again. I am a good judge of emotion and when I sense someones irritation with me.. I back off. I have a backbone.. but no one like to be pestered during the grieving process.
I will take the suggestion of being the reporter that does not fall to the wolfpack mentality. I feel that if people want to talk I need to let them know I am here to listen and tell their story, but until they are ready I won't force them. Subjects are human. Reporters should be human too.
Names of rape victims should only be reported if given consent from the victim. I don't understand how anyone can argue that names of rape victims constitutes as the publics right to know. I can't even imagine the emotion psychological and physical issues that arise from becoming a rape victim.. having the media exploit a sexual crime is unacceptable. The public has a right to know who is doing the raping and where the rapes are happening but they do not need to know the name of an individual who has gone through, in my mind, the worst crime there is.
I think a lot o ethica questions that arise for journalist are a result of lack of compassion. Maybe the media would be able to rid it's evil image if the press stopped acting like men and starting thinking with their brains and their hearts.
Seven:
Courts courts courts. Well I don't know really what to say about covering courts. I feel bad for anyone that is thrown into the court beat. I believe it is necessary to have a competent reporter who understands the legal system. I think the most compelling necessity of court reporting is to make sure everyone is playing the game fair. In general journalist duty is to make sure everyone is acting legit.
The legal system is intense.. laywers and judges wouldn't be paid as much as they are if i wasn't. I can try to understand the structure of the system and I think that that is the best heads up a court reporter can have.
Access to documents seems to be one of the larger challenges of court reporting. It is important to find necessary documents, because as the article says, printed documents are the best defense against libel.
side note: although this weeks reading was long, the website was really intriguing. I felt that the website was legit and speeching from experience. Much better than the text. so ++ for the reading selection.
Post-traumatic stress disorder, death threats, homicide, and crooked cops.. Boy oh Boy Dave Krajicek certainly sold me to crime beat reporting. In all honesty covering the crime beat actually seems fulfilling to me. Change starts somewhere, why not through covering corruption? Crime exists, crime is real.. it needs to be reported. Krajicek mentions something about how critics feel that a couple sentences debriefing on how typically the reported crime is in general should be included in a report. I can understand objections. However approaching crime reporting on a holistic level makes sense. Instead of reporting on the bad depressing aspects of the crime news, (isn't that all news not just crime beats?) investigate on trends and how crime effects the public at large.
Crime beat reporters don't appear to have many friends. If editors even clash with reporters, what is the problem. Who wants to read just the hard facts of a sexual assault? I can understand summarizing lead crimes, however the big picture should not be ignored. Maybe I my image of journalism is to involved. I want to write stories that mean something to people. I want people to be informed. I want people to know how to change their world and why it needs to be changed. I don't just want to write about a homicide.. I want to write about why homocides continue to occur in certain areas and how to prevent further homicides. But then again we are just talking about crime beats not feature stories. I surprise myself in saying that I might like crime beats. Mix in a little investigative reporting and crime beats... well I might just be prepared to tackle the organized crime that fronts as garbage collection.
Five:
note to self: "Never forget it's not our job to judge, only to tell the truth through reporting and writing."
A problem I have is that I don't like to be obtrusive. I've never been placed in the situation.. but I can guarentee that I will have a difficult time calling a victim or family member of a victim.. and then calling again and again. I am a good judge of emotion and when I sense someones irritation with me.. I back off. I have a backbone.. but no one like to be pestered during the grieving process.
I will take the suggestion of being the reporter that does not fall to the wolfpack mentality. I feel that if people want to talk I need to let them know I am here to listen and tell their story, but until they are ready I won't force them. Subjects are human. Reporters should be human too.
Names of rape victims should only be reported if given consent from the victim. I don't understand how anyone can argue that names of rape victims constitutes as the publics right to know. I can't even imagine the emotion psychological and physical issues that arise from becoming a rape victim.. having the media exploit a sexual crime is unacceptable. The public has a right to know who is doing the raping and where the rapes are happening but they do not need to know the name of an individual who has gone through, in my mind, the worst crime there is.
I think a lot o ethica questions that arise for journalist are a result of lack of compassion. Maybe the media would be able to rid it's evil image if the press stopped acting like men and starting thinking with their brains and their hearts.
Seven:
Courts courts courts. Well I don't know really what to say about covering courts. I feel bad for anyone that is thrown into the court beat. I believe it is necessary to have a competent reporter who understands the legal system. I think the most compelling necessity of court reporting is to make sure everyone is playing the game fair. In general journalist duty is to make sure everyone is acting legit.
The legal system is intense.. laywers and judges wouldn't be paid as much as they are if i wasn't. I can try to understand the structure of the system and I think that that is the best heads up a court reporter can have.
Access to documents seems to be one of the larger challenges of court reporting. It is important to find necessary documents, because as the article says, printed documents are the best defense against libel.
side note: although this weeks reading was long, the website was really intriguing. I felt that the website was legit and speeching from experience. Much better than the text. so ++ for the reading selection.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Fires and accidents and court reporting, oh my.
Well the reoccuring theme that great stories are rooted in a foundation of good reporting surfaces again. Although the text offers a long chapter on fire/accident/court stories, I feel the only way to master such writing is from practice. Until you are on a 20 min deadline of a devastation fire at a senior citizen community, you won't truly know how to deal with the situation.
It is pretty straight forward, figure out the WWWWH, and if time permits delve deeper. As long as you have the facts together you have a story. The text seems to condradict itself regarding one source stories. I feel that if all you have time for is to consult a police report, then state that the information comes from the police report. I do not think journalists should be required to know more than the police during early unravelings of a story. Court reporting is something I am not really familiar with. The text recommondation to ask as many questions as you need to to get the facts straight is helpful.
The only thing that really intersted me in the chapter was the section on ethics. The story on negligance of releasing the home address and name of an intended assult victim is just stupid. I understand the public has a right to know whats going on, however I feel that the present state of the media just views people and devastation accidents as stories. What editor would allow a story to print the name of a victim who's attacker is still on the lose? The press is too caught up with printing a story that is breaking news rather than understanding the victim.
Controversy over the rights of the press during court proceedings is also pretty stupid to me. Again I understand the journalists function is to inform the public, but come on man, don't interfere with someones life. Victims of crimes are already going through a horrific time, stop sticking your nose too deep into places it doesn't belong. The press does have to stay on its toes and make sure the freedom of the press remains free. If the press is to remain free, I feel that such freedom is often at the expense of someone else.
Overall I wouldn't mind writing accident or fire stories. As long as you have the basic facts you are in good shape.
"How do you like it, how do you like it, M(g)ore M(g)ore M(g)ore"
Well Al Gore won the nobel peace prize. hm. And some group of democrat looneys are trying to get Gore to the presidency without his approval. I don't understand why these people are wasting their time money on pushing Gore '08. Why would the man who is gaining celebrity status jump back into the political race? With Gores political track history, I would be afraid of what this election embarressement of would. Gore has different interests now that aren't completely political. Let Gore have fun with his emmy and noble peace prize, but give the guy a break, he doesn't want to wear the many hats of Mr. President anymore. If Hillary won the democrat ticket and Gore ran as vice, well I would certainly call that entertainment... but I really hope to never see the day. Anyways why would Gore take second chair to not only Bill Clinton, but is wife too? ehh. Forget about Gore poltics people. Democracts have a smorgusboard of interesting candidates this year. Gore would just cause trouble... hmm but maybe Democrat trouble isn't such a bad thing.
It is pretty straight forward, figure out the WWWWH, and if time permits delve deeper. As long as you have the facts together you have a story. The text seems to condradict itself regarding one source stories. I feel that if all you have time for is to consult a police report, then state that the information comes from the police report. I do not think journalists should be required to know more than the police during early unravelings of a story. Court reporting is something I am not really familiar with. The text recommondation to ask as many questions as you need to to get the facts straight is helpful.
The only thing that really intersted me in the chapter was the section on ethics. The story on negligance of releasing the home address and name of an intended assult victim is just stupid. I understand the public has a right to know whats going on, however I feel that the present state of the media just views people and devastation accidents as stories. What editor would allow a story to print the name of a victim who's attacker is still on the lose? The press is too caught up with printing a story that is breaking news rather than understanding the victim.
Controversy over the rights of the press during court proceedings is also pretty stupid to me. Again I understand the journalists function is to inform the public, but come on man, don't interfere with someones life. Victims of crimes are already going through a horrific time, stop sticking your nose too deep into places it doesn't belong. The press does have to stay on its toes and make sure the freedom of the press remains free. If the press is to remain free, I feel that such freedom is often at the expense of someone else.
Overall I wouldn't mind writing accident or fire stories. As long as you have the basic facts you are in good shape.
"How do you like it, how do you like it, M(g)ore M(g)ore M(g)ore"
Well Al Gore won the nobel peace prize. hm. And some group of democrat looneys are trying to get Gore to the presidency without his approval. I don't understand why these people are wasting their time money on pushing Gore '08. Why would the man who is gaining celebrity status jump back into the political race? With Gores political track history, I would be afraid of what this election embarressement of would. Gore has different interests now that aren't completely political. Let Gore have fun with his emmy and noble peace prize, but give the guy a break, he doesn't want to wear the many hats of Mr. President anymore. If Hillary won the democrat ticket and Gore ran as vice, well I would certainly call that entertainment... but I really hope to never see the day. Anyways why would Gore take second chair to not only Bill Clinton, but is wife too? ehh. Forget about Gore poltics people. Democracts have a smorgusboard of interesting candidates this year. Gore would just cause trouble... hmm but maybe Democrat trouble isn't such a bad thing.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
The public should be protected from becoming pawns to the press. On the reverse, shouldn't the press be protected from becoming the pawns of the public? Modern journalism's economic survive rests in the hands of meeting the needs, rather demands of the public. Libel cases, especially the ones ruled in favor of the press, becomes a deterrent for the press to continue our industries duty of 'social responsibiity'.
I can understand suing a news organization for publishing untrue defamatory information when infact the organization was well aware that the 'news' was false. As much as I believe the press should be able to roam free in a libertarian utopia, the press should not be able to knowingly print false information.
I do not understand how monetary reward justifies libel. Damage to a reputation can be bandaged by a dollar bill? Why would the public/public figures take money from an industry that works for the public and works hard to gain any profit? In my world, the accused would be forced to write an article apoligizing for publishing false information or damaging a reputation.
The actual malice test is a fair way to establish responsibility. Journalists, or atleast I, am not omniscient. We are not psychic. We know how to do our research, we know how to obtain facts and we know how to report those facts. As long as a journalists did the best she could to acquire the facts, and she had no doubt that her information was misleading, she should not have to fear the courts. We act as Lois Lowry's 'Giver'. We hold onto the memories and history of this world only to be shit on when not living up to some superficial ideology of professionalism created by some guild of heartless emotionless men. bah.
For all the journalists who hold true to morals and refuse to become servants to the judicial system, I salute you!
Politics And The English Language/Scholarly Prose :
"And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favourable to political conformity."
"All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia."
George Orwell's article actually made me think, I believe this proving his point about lack of emotion and meaning to modern language. The article highlighted linquistic tendencies I find myself adopting. In my mind scholarly and/or politcal writings pride themselves in being masters of bull shit, composed by men who write what they do simply to reread their work and marvel with a vain grin at the large load of bull shit they were able to produce.
As individuals slowly remove themselves from the meaning conveyed within their work, they do become faceless drones. Politicians dispense word vomit, and journalists regurgiate this word vomit only to pass it along to the public which then reregurtigates the mess of meaningless words.
What I took away from Orwell's article is: say what you feel, and who am I trying to impress?
Journalists should detach themselves from over stated phrases and supply the readers with meaning.
Orwell's gripe with language reminds me of an article I recently read on the Ethics of Care (something I think would be really interesting to look into in class because it really motivates me). Ethics of care requires the journalists to feel compassion and understanding for those they write about. Forgetting the objective rules of professional journalism, care ethics allows humanity to grace the pages of the paper.
I guess I am beginning to understand, by reading Orwell and the piece on scholarly prose, that news writing works best when eliminating the BS. By being precise and writing directly really is the best way to convey meaning. Back to the ethics care, direct writing does not mean that is must lack humanity. By writing what you know with direct language really shows that you know what you are writing. There is not need to confuse and be abstract. I do enjoy scholarly writing, but I need to recognize that there is a time and place for such language and it must adhere to meaning rather than eloquance.
TMI:
I guess it is a good thing that the media coverage can undergo such intense analysis. However, the fact that media coverage needs such an analysis is not so good. Problems do arise when general staff reporters are assigned to a story that needs specialized reports to cover nuclear energy situations. I feel that the large national news organizations did overplay TMI. However, when mixed information is being release from TMI sources it is hard not to create a craze. The news feeding frenzy does not help evaluate stories that involve a 'general state of emergency'.
I do not like that the small local news organization around TMI were pushed aside by national publications. If anything the local news will bare a greater significance to the community.
It is important to know the facts, and know that the facts are facts.
Hillary Clinton, no joke.
So Hillary Clinton is not the cold hearted witch the press makes her out to be. Why do I say that, because Hillary is beginning to show her 'humane' side and can laugh. It was reported that on all the the 5 major sunday news talk shows, Hillary showed off her new peronsable laugh. Often laughing for not reason, or during some not so funny questions. I view this as a poor publicity stunt by Hillary. If I were Hillary I would fire my PR people for advising me to look like a totaly schmuck . Hillary is not warm, she does not like puppies or babies. This whole funny Hillary is not laughing matter. I don't want a president that will laugh off the state of universal health insurance when she botches the whole system up. Remember Hillary, when the people aren't laughing with you, they are laughing at you!
I can understand suing a news organization for publishing untrue defamatory information when infact the organization was well aware that the 'news' was false. As much as I believe the press should be able to roam free in a libertarian utopia, the press should not be able to knowingly print false information.
I do not understand how monetary reward justifies libel. Damage to a reputation can be bandaged by a dollar bill? Why would the public/public figures take money from an industry that works for the public and works hard to gain any profit? In my world, the accused would be forced to write an article apoligizing for publishing false information or damaging a reputation.
The actual malice test is a fair way to establish responsibility. Journalists, or atleast I, am not omniscient. We are not psychic. We know how to do our research, we know how to obtain facts and we know how to report those facts. As long as a journalists did the best she could to acquire the facts, and she had no doubt that her information was misleading, she should not have to fear the courts. We act as Lois Lowry's 'Giver'. We hold onto the memories and history of this world only to be shit on when not living up to some superficial ideology of professionalism created by some guild of heartless emotionless men. bah.
For all the journalists who hold true to morals and refuse to become servants to the judicial system, I salute you!
Politics And The English Language/Scholarly Prose :
"And this reduced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at any rate favourable to political conformity."
"All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia."
George Orwell's article actually made me think, I believe this proving his point about lack of emotion and meaning to modern language. The article highlighted linquistic tendencies I find myself adopting. In my mind scholarly and/or politcal writings pride themselves in being masters of bull shit, composed by men who write what they do simply to reread their work and marvel with a vain grin at the large load of bull shit they were able to produce.
As individuals slowly remove themselves from the meaning conveyed within their work, they do become faceless drones. Politicians dispense word vomit, and journalists regurgiate this word vomit only to pass it along to the public which then reregurtigates the mess of meaningless words.
What I took away from Orwell's article is: say what you feel, and who am I trying to impress?
Journalists should detach themselves from over stated phrases and supply the readers with meaning.
Orwell's gripe with language reminds me of an article I recently read on the Ethics of Care (something I think would be really interesting to look into in class because it really motivates me). Ethics of care requires the journalists to feel compassion and understanding for those they write about. Forgetting the objective rules of professional journalism, care ethics allows humanity to grace the pages of the paper.
I guess I am beginning to understand, by reading Orwell and the piece on scholarly prose, that news writing works best when eliminating the BS. By being precise and writing directly really is the best way to convey meaning. Back to the ethics care, direct writing does not mean that is must lack humanity. By writing what you know with direct language really shows that you know what you are writing. There is not need to confuse and be abstract. I do enjoy scholarly writing, but I need to recognize that there is a time and place for such language and it must adhere to meaning rather than eloquance.
TMI:
I guess it is a good thing that the media coverage can undergo such intense analysis. However, the fact that media coverage needs such an analysis is not so good. Problems do arise when general staff reporters are assigned to a story that needs specialized reports to cover nuclear energy situations. I feel that the large national news organizations did overplay TMI. However, when mixed information is being release from TMI sources it is hard not to create a craze. The news feeding frenzy does not help evaluate stories that involve a 'general state of emergency'.
I do not like that the small local news organization around TMI were pushed aside by national publications. If anything the local news will bare a greater significance to the community.
It is important to know the facts, and know that the facts are facts.
Hillary Clinton, no joke.
So Hillary Clinton is not the cold hearted witch the press makes her out to be. Why do I say that, because Hillary is beginning to show her 'humane' side and can laugh. It was reported that on all the the 5 major sunday news talk shows, Hillary showed off her new peronsable laugh. Often laughing for not reason, or during some not so funny questions. I view this as a poor publicity stunt by Hillary. If I were Hillary I would fire my PR people for advising me to look like a totaly schmuck . Hillary is not warm, she does not like puppies or babies. This whole funny Hillary is not laughing matter. I don't want a president that will laugh off the state of universal health insurance when she botches the whole system up. Remember Hillary, when the people aren't laughing with you, they are laughing at you!
Sunday, September 30, 2007
News Releases, finally something that makes my life a bit easier.
I have never rewritten a news release for a story, but I feel that it would be a less stressful story than reporting on a city councel meeting or something to that effect. Writing news releases actually intrigues me more than rewriting them to fit within a story. The bias self-image building aspect that makes up a lot of releases would be fun to write.
The book commented on how most new releases that get printed are the ones that serve a public interest. I am taking media ethics right now, and have been pondering the public interest/social responsibility vs. free press notion. Is it the responsibility of the press to rewrite releases so that they serve they serve the interest of the public? I don't know any specific examples, but I would not be surprised to learn that several news publications print stories bases on news releases about issues the news organization supports. I actually feel that news organizations have the right to select which releases to rewrite, and what focus they wish to take. As long as the story is not sensationalized, all news releases do not have to be differected to the enitre public interest -- just the interest of the selected audience of the publication or the news organizations interest.
It does not surprise me either that press agents would create quotes for boss. My questions is, is it my responsibility to exclude self rightous quotes? I know you should back up your quotes or atleast validate them, however if a PR rep, who is the voice of whoever they are representing, provides me with a quote why should I eliminate it? I feel accrediting the quote to the PR rep tells more about the person they are representing then removing it.
Writing stories based on news releases interests me, because I feel I could do much of the work right from my desk. You don't need attend the event necessarily or meet with anyone. A few phone calls, fact checking, and depending on where they story goes a bit of investigation can create a legit story. Instead of trying to figure out what the news is, the news is already given to you, you just have to read through the BS.
"And the beat goes on, ba dump da dum dum."
The book admits that speeches/news conferences/meetings can be dull and boring. The remedy for dull and boring reporting is found within how the story is written. The book says to take note of how speakers talk, how they use gestures, and their overall physical presentation. I feel it is also very important to tell your audience how the speaker uttered a response to a question. Why is it that correctly reporting a 'yell' or 'whisper' loses objectivity. When I read a story I feel these descriptions add to the story, and that the line of sensationalism is not crossed. The story often is in how the speacher talks and not necessarily what was said.
Reaction stories I feel should allow for lenient objectivity. Report more than comments. Report how the speecher reacted to the audience reaction. The text says towards the end of the chapter that it is my job to make people interested in my news story. The present journalist creed needs to adapt. The observations of the reporter deserve to be written. Descriptive words that deviate from the neutral norm can still be used to represent the medias social responsibility.
I agree in speech/news conference/meeting stories the facts come first. As long as the facts are presented, the reporter should be allowed to use language that makes the facts seem human. I feel that people want more than the facts. People want to relate on a human level.
Campaigning in 2007
Former NC senator John Edwards was the first presidential candidate to appear on MTV's real-time interactive forum. When I think of MTV's involvement with political forums I recall Bill Clinton's savy saxophone playing and boxer vs. brief questions. Students at UofNH voiced serious questions at the forum directed towards todays youth and young adults. Past elections yoing voter turn out has been to say the least embarrassing. The way the current president has conducted business the past few years, I feel college students will finally step up the plate and become involved with the 2008 election. Edwards appearence on the MTV forum was a great campaign move. It is reported that the majority of viewers felt Edwards answered questions reasonabley. I don't think it would have mattered how well Edwards responded to questions. It matters that he is placing his name into the lexicon of college students.
Using mediums that todays youth can understand is a big plus for Edwards. No other candidate has made a date as to when they will appear on the MTV forum. The youtube debates that appeared earlier this month is also only example of candidates finally understanding how to address the public. The people need to ask the questions. Instead of fearing public opinion, candidates are finally making the attempt to atleast appease the public voice.
I have never rewritten a news release for a story, but I feel that it would be a less stressful story than reporting on a city councel meeting or something to that effect. Writing news releases actually intrigues me more than rewriting them to fit within a story. The bias self-image building aspect that makes up a lot of releases would be fun to write.
The book commented on how most new releases that get printed are the ones that serve a public interest. I am taking media ethics right now, and have been pondering the public interest/social responsibility vs. free press notion. Is it the responsibility of the press to rewrite releases so that they serve they serve the interest of the public? I don't know any specific examples, but I would not be surprised to learn that several news publications print stories bases on news releases about issues the news organization supports. I actually feel that news organizations have the right to select which releases to rewrite, and what focus they wish to take. As long as the story is not sensationalized, all news releases do not have to be differected to the enitre public interest -- just the interest of the selected audience of the publication or the news organizations interest.
It does not surprise me either that press agents would create quotes for boss. My questions is, is it my responsibility to exclude self rightous quotes? I know you should back up your quotes or atleast validate them, however if a PR rep, who is the voice of whoever they are representing, provides me with a quote why should I eliminate it? I feel accrediting the quote to the PR rep tells more about the person they are representing then removing it.
Writing stories based on news releases interests me, because I feel I could do much of the work right from my desk. You don't need attend the event necessarily or meet with anyone. A few phone calls, fact checking, and depending on where they story goes a bit of investigation can create a legit story. Instead of trying to figure out what the news is, the news is already given to you, you just have to read through the BS.
"And the beat goes on, ba dump da dum dum."
The book admits that speeches/news conferences/meetings can be dull and boring. The remedy for dull and boring reporting is found within how the story is written. The book says to take note of how speakers talk, how they use gestures, and their overall physical presentation. I feel it is also very important to tell your audience how the speaker uttered a response to a question. Why is it that correctly reporting a 'yell' or 'whisper' loses objectivity. When I read a story I feel these descriptions add to the story, and that the line of sensationalism is not crossed. The story often is in how the speacher talks and not necessarily what was said.
Reaction stories I feel should allow for lenient objectivity. Report more than comments. Report how the speecher reacted to the audience reaction. The text says towards the end of the chapter that it is my job to make people interested in my news story. The present journalist creed needs to adapt. The observations of the reporter deserve to be written. Descriptive words that deviate from the neutral norm can still be used to represent the medias social responsibility.
I agree in speech/news conference/meeting stories the facts come first. As long as the facts are presented, the reporter should be allowed to use language that makes the facts seem human. I feel that people want more than the facts. People want to relate on a human level.
Campaigning in 2007
Former NC senator John Edwards was the first presidential candidate to appear on MTV's real-time interactive forum. When I think of MTV's involvement with political forums I recall Bill Clinton's savy saxophone playing and boxer vs. brief questions. Students at UofNH voiced serious questions at the forum directed towards todays youth and young adults. Past elections yoing voter turn out has been to say the least embarrassing. The way the current president has conducted business the past few years, I feel college students will finally step up the plate and become involved with the 2008 election. Edwards appearence on the MTV forum was a great campaign move. It is reported that the majority of viewers felt Edwards answered questions reasonabley. I don't think it would have mattered how well Edwards responded to questions. It matters that he is placing his name into the lexicon of college students.
Using mediums that todays youth can understand is a big plus for Edwards. No other candidate has made a date as to when they will appear on the MTV forum. The youtube debates that appeared earlier this month is also only example of candidates finally understanding how to address the public. The people need to ask the questions. Instead of fearing public opinion, candidates are finally making the attempt to atleast appease the public voice.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
In death the news finally allows the shroud of insensitivty to be lifted from the business' eyes, however profit remains the focus.
Obit writing appears pretty straightforward. When dealing with death it takes a very cold heart to botch the job.
"These obituaries are not formulaic pieces. They are life stories." I was surprised to read this quote from the text. Why is it life and civility only finds itself within the obits. Stories that showcase individuals living and allow recognition for life's simple achievements should be found throughout a paper. Humanity is lost within the grey shades of print.
The idea of beat reporters writing the obits for the individuals they have covered seems like logical reasoning. To ensure these 'life stories' that obits should be, a writer that understands the deceases professional life is practical.
Overall, obits capture death and how long can you dwell on the latter.
The Petraeus Deal
http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/568045,CST-NWS-sweet21.article
Barack Obama did not vote on the resolution regarding the Moveon ad in the Times. Hillary Clinton voted no. As puss of a move Obama played in not casting a vote, his justification makes sense to me:
This amendment was a stunt designed only to score cheap political points while what we should be doing is focusing on the deadly serious challenge we face in Iraq.... By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics. I registered my views on the ad itself the day it appeared.
Obama's right. Senate took a day to sit bicker over image politics instead of continuing discuss on Iraq troops and the situation in the middle east.
Obit writing appears pretty straightforward. When dealing with death it takes a very cold heart to botch the job.
"These obituaries are not formulaic pieces. They are life stories." I was surprised to read this quote from the text. Why is it life and civility only finds itself within the obits. Stories that showcase individuals living and allow recognition for life's simple achievements should be found throughout a paper. Humanity is lost within the grey shades of print.
The idea of beat reporters writing the obits for the individuals they have covered seems like logical reasoning. To ensure these 'life stories' that obits should be, a writer that understands the deceases professional life is practical.
Overall, obits capture death and how long can you dwell on the latter.
The Petraeus Deal
http://www.suntimes.com/news/sweet/568045,CST-NWS-sweet21.article
Barack Obama did not vote on the resolution regarding the Moveon ad in the Times. Hillary Clinton voted no. As puss of a move Obama played in not casting a vote, his justification makes sense to me:
This amendment was a stunt designed only to score cheap political points while what we should be doing is focusing on the deadly serious challenge we face in Iraq.... By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics. I registered my views on the ad itself the day it appeared.
Obama's right. Senate took a day to sit bicker over image politics instead of continuing discuss on Iraq troops and the situation in the middle east.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
She said what??
Ch. 4 In Their Own Words
I'm not sure what to comment about in chapter 4. The only thing I found particularly interesting was a quote about prepublication review (ppr). Kelly McBride said, "Every day, beat reporters make deals -- explicit and implicit -- with their sources about what to print, when to print it, and what to leave out. Rarely do they tell their readers about these deals. Sometimes they don't even tell their editors."
Lately I have been apathetic about anything concerning the world of journalism, however McBride's quote was able to make me ponder (or at least rub my chin in a ponderous manner). As I study ethics and the media's obligation to serve the public, I find the 'behind the scene' activities like those mentioned above to fall within the grey area of upholding the public interest. I've had discussions about if and when it is okay to do undercover work or without that you are a journalist, and I feel that ppr is just as deceptive to the public as the former is to a source. I never really knew that writers go back to the source to review what is to be printed. I suppose it is a nice gesture, however it gives the source too much power of the media. Whose interest is ppr concerning? I can understand if you want to check out some quotes to eliminate any possible libel, but to give the source the ability to disapprove of what is to be printed? ehh, I don't know how I feel about that.
Regarding the whole, on the record off the record.. that's just too much for me. It does open my eyes to having to talk to all sides of the story. I'm a pretty not so objective person, and these little hints here and there on how to straighten out my crooked journalism halo is very helpful.
The E-Media tibits was surprisingly expremely uplifting. I'm having this quasi angel devil debate over my future with journalism, and seeing that their are other thigns to write about than hard political news is awesome. The RSS feed about environmental issues is just awesome, and seeing how people responded to the feed is even cooler. By making those environmental issues accessible to more audiences makes this whole thing seem like its worth it. My only gripe is that with the feed you can censor what information you receive. It is a little naive to think that you can go through life reading and hearing about only the good things you want to hear about.
The blog for the timetable was really interesting, I only wish it was in english. I'm not sure what magical journalism knowledge I gained from the blog, but the timetable itself was impressive. So must information is packed into that flash feature, its so modern and unconventional typically I would dismiss it as being a form of journalism. As I become a discouraged jounralism student, these modern multimedia possibilites are shining just enough light of hope.
Hillary Health Care: The Reprise
Hillary Clinton pushes so hard she would make a great drug dealer. Evidently Hillary is to make another universial health care proposal this monday. I read a figure that read something like 50 million Americans are uninsured. I agree something needs to be down about that number because it seems rather unamerican to me. I don't really remember Hillary's first health care push in the early '90s, all I know is that it didn't go through and that it was pretty complex. My friend from home told me about this kid she knows that can cough up blood on demand, but he can't get anything done about it because he isnt insured. That is what I think of when I think about the health insurance. I don't know how great univerisal health care would be in the US of A. Where there is univerisal health care isn't it true that you are placed on waiting lists for months at a time and seeing a doctor becomes near impossible? I agree with the Democrats that something needs to be done to the system. I think the big drug companies and giant insurance companies who are profitting off of sick people should be the ones interrogated. Hillary should be coming up with a clear and concise plan for Iraq before focusing on destorying the American health care system.
I'm not sure what to comment about in chapter 4. The only thing I found particularly interesting was a quote about prepublication review (ppr). Kelly McBride said, "Every day, beat reporters make deals -- explicit and implicit -- with their sources about what to print, when to print it, and what to leave out. Rarely do they tell their readers about these deals. Sometimes they don't even tell their editors."
Lately I have been apathetic about anything concerning the world of journalism, however McBride's quote was able to make me ponder (or at least rub my chin in a ponderous manner). As I study ethics and the media's obligation to serve the public, I find the 'behind the scene' activities like those mentioned above to fall within the grey area of upholding the public interest. I've had discussions about if and when it is okay to do undercover work or without that you are a journalist, and I feel that ppr is just as deceptive to the public as the former is to a source. I never really knew that writers go back to the source to review what is to be printed. I suppose it is a nice gesture, however it gives the source too much power of the media. Whose interest is ppr concerning? I can understand if you want to check out some quotes to eliminate any possible libel, but to give the source the ability to disapprove of what is to be printed? ehh, I don't know how I feel about that.
Regarding the whole, on the record off the record.. that's just too much for me. It does open my eyes to having to talk to all sides of the story. I'm a pretty not so objective person, and these little hints here and there on how to straighten out my crooked journalism halo is very helpful.
The E-Media tibits was surprisingly expremely uplifting. I'm having this quasi angel devil debate over my future with journalism, and seeing that their are other thigns to write about than hard political news is awesome. The RSS feed about environmental issues is just awesome, and seeing how people responded to the feed is even cooler. By making those environmental issues accessible to more audiences makes this whole thing seem like its worth it. My only gripe is that with the feed you can censor what information you receive. It is a little naive to think that you can go through life reading and hearing about only the good things you want to hear about.
The blog for the timetable was really interesting, I only wish it was in english. I'm not sure what magical journalism knowledge I gained from the blog, but the timetable itself was impressive. So must information is packed into that flash feature, its so modern and unconventional typically I would dismiss it as being a form of journalism. As I become a discouraged jounralism student, these modern multimedia possibilites are shining just enough light of hope.
Hillary Health Care: The Reprise
Hillary Clinton pushes so hard she would make a great drug dealer. Evidently Hillary is to make another universial health care proposal this monday. I read a figure that read something like 50 million Americans are uninsured. I agree something needs to be down about that number because it seems rather unamerican to me. I don't really remember Hillary's first health care push in the early '90s, all I know is that it didn't go through and that it was pretty complex. My friend from home told me about this kid she knows that can cough up blood on demand, but he can't get anything done about it because he isnt insured. That is what I think of when I think about the health insurance. I don't know how great univerisal health care would be in the US of A. Where there is univerisal health care isn't it true that you are placed on waiting lists for months at a time and seeing a doctor becomes near impossible? I agree with the Democrats that something needs to be done to the system. I think the big drug companies and giant insurance companies who are profitting off of sick people should be the ones interrogated. Hillary should be coming up with a clear and concise plan for Iraq before focusing on destorying the American health care system.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Chapters 1-3
The more I study journalism and 'act' as a journalist the weight of responsibility nearly sends me packing straight for the hills. I feel that the public does not fully understand the necessity of journalists in a democracy. My grandfather wakes up every morning, walks to the mailbox, and expects to find his daily copy of The Buffalo News. Appreciation towards the timeliness of his paper is not expressed. When he reads the paper, he does not glow with gratitude for a well written story. However, when he reads a story that is not in congruence with his point of view, you most definitely hear about it.
Ideas of truth and loyalty when working as a journalist seem standard and routine. The concept of Civic Journalism is one that brings light to my cynical view of the profession. The text chatters about how we must uphold a certain moral standard and are obligated to report stories that the people need to know about. Yes, attention must be paid to maintaining a reliable and credible means of news production, however I often feel that that journalists stop once the story is printed. Once the story is exposed that the mayor of the town has been taking vacations to Las Vegas at the expense of tax payers or once it is reported that the number of homeless mothers is increasing at an alarming rate, what is the responsibility of a journalist then? As a reader, I want to know how to change the news. Once a story is printed, there should not be a similar story to report if a journalist has done the proper job. I feel journalists have an active responsibility in helping change democracy. Tell me how to help the poor people suffering in New Orleans a year later. Who should I get in touch with to prevent another murder in my city? Is independence lost once the journalists steps out of the mold, and becomes an active citizen? I think not. I often hear people complain that they do not read or watch the news because it is depressing. If the world of journalism could just shine a single ray of hope on the often dark world of the average joe, wouldn't it be worth it? The concept of objectivity also forces me to smirk. I find it nearly impossible to remain objective and to compose a meaningful news report. I feel as long as the facts are clearly separated from opinion, what is the matter?
Media Convergence. Who thought of this? ahh Mr. McCorporate I suspect no doubt. Yes Yes newspapers need to make money... money is made by advertisements, I understand the rules of capitalism. My question is how can civic journalists be criticize for adding humanity as a bullet point under job description, when money hungry corporations are gobbling up news companies left and right? Independence is lost when the journalist offers suggestions? Independence is lost when a quarter of the countries dailies are published by the same company where the same CEO sits high atop his penthouse shouting the same standardized voice over the loudspeaker to his brainwashed peons below. I understand the overload of news sources out there and how converging different media outlets would help the overall operation, however was it converging that we saw when Walt Disney ate up ABC? No. That is corporate domination propelled by billion dollar denominations. bah. moving on.
In response to interviewing, I feel that it is an art that one crafts overtime. Interviewing is essential, however it is one component that I am weak in. It is difficult to teach interviewing and to read about techniques. The only way I will improve is by applying what I know. I would feel better about interviewing if I knew that many others become overwhelming with social anxiety like I do. The one tip that proves to be of some use is that it is okay to ask a source to repeat themselves. I need to remember time and time again.
You know you went to a New York public high school when:
1. the only African country you can locate is South Africa
2. you think an independent clause is what Mrs. Santa Clause feels like on Christmas Eve
3. comma placement only depends on if it looks good in a sentence.
The AP punctuation guide discusses punctuation I would never even know if I was using it correctly or not. As a NY high school graduate I did not learn grammar, punctuation, nor geography.
O Squared: Barack Obama and running mate Oprah
Oprah backing Obama for presidency is not current news. The star studded fundraiser Oprah held at her private estate in Montecito, California and the $3 million raised for Obama is news. I find no fault in Oprah lending Mr. Obama a golden hand during his campaign, especially if that means Hillary Clinton gets bumped out of the spotlight. If individuals support Obama solely on the advice of Oprah then there is a problem with the American people. Oprah in all reality has enough money to beat out all of Hillary's 'Hillraisers' (including Mr. Hsu). With Oprah's name now tattooed to Obama, I am curious to see if Oprah's stranglehold over America will prove itself again. When the Democratic campaigning comes to an end I am curious to see if how Oprah's support will affect the polls and if she will increase her support. Again, as long as Hillary Clinton gets the boot I'll be a happy camper.
NY Daily News
The more I study journalism and 'act' as a journalist the weight of responsibility nearly sends me packing straight for the hills. I feel that the public does not fully understand the necessity of journalists in a democracy. My grandfather wakes up every morning, walks to the mailbox, and expects to find his daily copy of The Buffalo News. Appreciation towards the timeliness of his paper is not expressed. When he reads the paper, he does not glow with gratitude for a well written story. However, when he reads a story that is not in congruence with his point of view, you most definitely hear about it.
Ideas of truth and loyalty when working as a journalist seem standard and routine. The concept of Civic Journalism is one that brings light to my cynical view of the profession. The text chatters about how we must uphold a certain moral standard and are obligated to report stories that the people need to know about. Yes, attention must be paid to maintaining a reliable and credible means of news production, however I often feel that that journalists stop once the story is printed. Once the story is exposed that the mayor of the town has been taking vacations to Las Vegas at the expense of tax payers or once it is reported that the number of homeless mothers is increasing at an alarming rate, what is the responsibility of a journalist then? As a reader, I want to know how to change the news. Once a story is printed, there should not be a similar story to report if a journalist has done the proper job. I feel journalists have an active responsibility in helping change democracy. Tell me how to help the poor people suffering in New Orleans a year later. Who should I get in touch with to prevent another murder in my city? Is independence lost once the journalists steps out of the mold, and becomes an active citizen? I think not. I often hear people complain that they do not read or watch the news because it is depressing. If the world of journalism could just shine a single ray of hope on the often dark world of the average joe, wouldn't it be worth it? The concept of objectivity also forces me to smirk. I find it nearly impossible to remain objective and to compose a meaningful news report. I feel as long as the facts are clearly separated from opinion, what is the matter?
Media Convergence. Who thought of this? ahh Mr. McCorporate I suspect no doubt. Yes Yes newspapers need to make money... money is made by advertisements, I understand the rules of capitalism. My question is how can civic journalists be criticize for adding humanity as a bullet point under job description, when money hungry corporations are gobbling up news companies left and right? Independence is lost when the journalist offers suggestions? Independence is lost when a quarter of the countries dailies are published by the same company where the same CEO sits high atop his penthouse shouting the same standardized voice over the loudspeaker to his brainwashed peons below. I understand the overload of news sources out there and how converging different media outlets would help the overall operation, however was it converging that we saw when Walt Disney ate up ABC? No. That is corporate domination propelled by billion dollar denominations. bah. moving on.
In response to interviewing, I feel that it is an art that one crafts overtime. Interviewing is essential, however it is one component that I am weak in. It is difficult to teach interviewing and to read about techniques. The only way I will improve is by applying what I know. I would feel better about interviewing if I knew that many others become overwhelming with social anxiety like I do. The one tip that proves to be of some use is that it is okay to ask a source to repeat themselves. I need to remember time and time again.
You know you went to a New York public high school when:
1. the only African country you can locate is South Africa
2. you think an independent clause is what Mrs. Santa Clause feels like on Christmas Eve
3. comma placement only depends on if it looks good in a sentence.
The AP punctuation guide discusses punctuation I would never even know if I was using it correctly or not. As a NY high school graduate I did not learn grammar, punctuation, nor geography.
O Squared: Barack Obama and running mate Oprah
Oprah backing Obama for presidency is not current news. The star studded fundraiser Oprah held at her private estate in Montecito, California and the $3 million raised for Obama is news. I find no fault in Oprah lending Mr. Obama a golden hand during his campaign, especially if that means Hillary Clinton gets bumped out of the spotlight. If individuals support Obama solely on the advice of Oprah then there is a problem with the American people. Oprah in all reality has enough money to beat out all of Hillary's 'Hillraisers' (including Mr. Hsu). With Oprah's name now tattooed to Obama, I am curious to see if Oprah's stranglehold over America will prove itself again. When the Democratic campaigning comes to an end I am curious to see if how Oprah's support will affect the polls and if she will increase her support. Again, as long as Hillary Clinton gets the boot I'll be a happy camper.
NY Daily News
Monday, September 3, 2007
Inverted Pyramid Shmyramid
Chapters 7 and 8
I understand the logic of the inverted pyramid. People read the news for the news. However, I feel that the inverted pyramid retards the news, writers, and readers. What is storytelling when the audience is not required to read past the wanton lead.
Perhaps my discontent for the inverted pyramid is really discontent towards the news audience. The audience wants to know the facts, and they want to know them now -- a comparable image to consumer America. The "so what" aspect discussed through out the chapter is one that deserves attention. I write to inform others, and to stir emotion. The human nature is striped from the news if I am confined to single paragraph leads -- packaged and filled with impersonal facts.
In the end however the lead needs to sell the rest of the article. The lead must draw the reader in. The inverted lead is a paragraph or two with such importance it should be held up high on a mighty pedistool when mastered.
My agitation, that was chapter 7 and the inverted pyramid, was quickly relieved by columnist James Kilpatrick's quote, "... if we write upon the sand, let us write as well as we can upon the sand before the waves come in."
Those words give me hope. We, as journalists, are historians. Although the history we write today may be replaced by morning -- write it well.
Words are mystical, hypocritical, emotional, dangerous, and above all powerful. The first element of good writing discussed in chapter 8 is: Be Precise. I find that statement filled with a lot of wisdom. According to Don Miguel Ruiz, author of "The Four Agreements" precision with your language is monumental to your happiness. The four agreements are the only four agreements a human need to make with themselves and comply to be a happy person. Writing what you mean exactly is an element of good writing and one of good living that I am more than happy to embrace.
The concept of asking interviewees to restate quotes or to translate into easier terms is one that I need to remember.
My writing tends to be made up of long complex sentences. When I write news I need to remember short sentences help with clarity. I find it difficult to know when to write short more concise sentences and when to allow myself to create concrete images. I suppose my problem is that I feel all articles should be written like feature literary articles. Short and simple -- short simple and sweet.
"The State of the News Media":
Such a massive evaluation on the state of web based journalism is overwhelming. Web journalism is a readers venue that I am just becoming acquainted with. As of last year I added bbc.com as my browsers homepage. I don't expect much from my web news, most likely because I also obtain my news from newspapers and tv. I find web news as just a quicker means of finding out what is important right now in the world.
The large critique on user customization of web news is one that goes far over my head. I do not think I would be turned off of a news site because I was not able to pick and choose what news I received. The ability to customize my news intake is a luxury I overlook.
Multimedia and site depth are the two components that really influence my opinion of web news. The possibilities of the internet are beyond my comprehension. The ability to be more than just simple text is something I feel web news should take advantage of. Show me the news in writing -- upload a video to help me better understand the devastation in Darfur. I am not as big of a news junkie as I should be, so when a news site offers depth it makes my life a lot easier. One aspect of bbc.com that I enjoy is the ability to view archived articles relating to the same topic. It does not surprise my that Google was ranked the highest in site depth. The algorithms involved in a Google search alone is huge -- applying those algorithms to Google news just seems natural.
I was glad to see that bbc ranked high within the judging. This semester I am required to read daily the New York Times. I find myself poking around nytimes.com rather than the print newspaper. Times online does not lose its distinct Times print style. However I approach my online news reading differently than my print. The Times articles online are the same longer coverage stories like the print. I enjoy bbc.com over nytimes.com because when I read online I'm on the go. I scan. BBC offers shorter quicker to read content that fits me needs.
In the end I find it a phenominal feat to rate all the site profiles as Project for Excellence in Journalism did. I don't think I really appreciated the critiquing of the sites. I am attracted to certain web bases news for my own reasons. I have my own scale to judge by and thus far it has sufficed.
Democratic Bundler oooops....
The Norman Hsu situation is one that I feel is bigger than the media is reporting. How could the leading Democrat candidates not know that they were receiving donations in the $100,000 range from a fugitive??? Another question is how did this man reenter the political scene after a 15 hiatus?
An editorial in the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/03/AR2007090301082.html
brings to light big campaign donors should be revealed to the media and public. In my opinion the Democratic candidates that received money from Hsu knew of his criminal background. They knew he was wanted in California for fraud. I also believe that presidential candidates receive donations from drug lords and the mafia. Where does it end? How can someone with an entourage like Hillary's not do the research on the people that are propelling your campaign? I don't care so much about the fate of Hsu. I do care about how this situation exemplifies how corrupt and misleading the game of politics is. It is all about money and no one cares if it is dirty money or not. The Democrats were caught -- and oh aren't they wonderful for donating that dirty money to charity. The Post editorial also includes that in the Senate right now is a bill waiting for approval that will force nominees to disclose who their bundlers are. The investigation into the fleeing Hsu should continue, however I feel the attention should be placed on all the other bundlers donating to the party nominees. Hsu was caught, now lets see hsu else will the press will catch.
I understand the logic of the inverted pyramid. People read the news for the news. However, I feel that the inverted pyramid retards the news, writers, and readers. What is storytelling when the audience is not required to read past the wanton lead.
Perhaps my discontent for the inverted pyramid is really discontent towards the news audience. The audience wants to know the facts, and they want to know them now -- a comparable image to consumer America. The "so what" aspect discussed through out the chapter is one that deserves attention. I write to inform others, and to stir emotion. The human nature is striped from the news if I am confined to single paragraph leads -- packaged and filled with impersonal facts.
In the end however the lead needs to sell the rest of the article. The lead must draw the reader in. The inverted lead is a paragraph or two with such importance it should be held up high on a mighty pedistool when mastered.
My agitation, that was chapter 7 and the inverted pyramid, was quickly relieved by columnist James Kilpatrick's quote, "... if we write upon the sand, let us write as well as we can upon the sand before the waves come in."
Those words give me hope. We, as journalists, are historians. Although the history we write today may be replaced by morning -- write it well.
Words are mystical, hypocritical, emotional, dangerous, and above all powerful. The first element of good writing discussed in chapter 8 is: Be Precise. I find that statement filled with a lot of wisdom. According to Don Miguel Ruiz, author of "The Four Agreements" precision with your language is monumental to your happiness. The four agreements are the only four agreements a human need to make with themselves and comply to be a happy person. Writing what you mean exactly is an element of good writing and one of good living that I am more than happy to embrace.
The concept of asking interviewees to restate quotes or to translate into easier terms is one that I need to remember.
My writing tends to be made up of long complex sentences. When I write news I need to remember short sentences help with clarity. I find it difficult to know when to write short more concise sentences and when to allow myself to create concrete images. I suppose my problem is that I feel all articles should be written like feature literary articles. Short and simple -- short simple and sweet.
"The State of the News Media":
Such a massive evaluation on the state of web based journalism is overwhelming. Web journalism is a readers venue that I am just becoming acquainted with. As of last year I added bbc.com as my browsers homepage. I don't expect much from my web news, most likely because I also obtain my news from newspapers and tv. I find web news as just a quicker means of finding out what is important right now in the world.
The large critique on user customization of web news is one that goes far over my head. I do not think I would be turned off of a news site because I was not able to pick and choose what news I received. The ability to customize my news intake is a luxury I overlook.
Multimedia and site depth are the two components that really influence my opinion of web news. The possibilities of the internet are beyond my comprehension. The ability to be more than just simple text is something I feel web news should take advantage of. Show me the news in writing -- upload a video to help me better understand the devastation in Darfur. I am not as big of a news junkie as I should be, so when a news site offers depth it makes my life a lot easier. One aspect of bbc.com that I enjoy is the ability to view archived articles relating to the same topic. It does not surprise my that Google was ranked the highest in site depth. The algorithms involved in a Google search alone is huge -- applying those algorithms to Google news just seems natural.
I was glad to see that bbc ranked high within the judging. This semester I am required to read daily the New York Times. I find myself poking around nytimes.com rather than the print newspaper. Times online does not lose its distinct Times print style. However I approach my online news reading differently than my print. The Times articles online are the same longer coverage stories like the print. I enjoy bbc.com over nytimes.com because when I read online I'm on the go. I scan. BBC offers shorter quicker to read content that fits me needs.
In the end I find it a phenominal feat to rate all the site profiles as Project for Excellence in Journalism did. I don't think I really appreciated the critiquing of the sites. I am attracted to certain web bases news for my own reasons. I have my own scale to judge by and thus far it has sufficed.
Democratic Bundler oooops....
The Norman Hsu situation is one that I feel is bigger than the media is reporting. How could the leading Democrat candidates not know that they were receiving donations in the $100,000 range from a fugitive??? Another question is how did this man reenter the political scene after a 15 hiatus?
An editorial in the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/03/AR2007090301082.html
brings to light big campaign donors should be revealed to the media and public. In my opinion the Democratic candidates that received money from Hsu knew of his criminal background. They knew he was wanted in California for fraud. I also believe that presidential candidates receive donations from drug lords and the mafia. Where does it end? How can someone with an entourage like Hillary's not do the research on the people that are propelling your campaign? I don't care so much about the fate of Hsu. I do care about how this situation exemplifies how corrupt and misleading the game of politics is. It is all about money and no one cares if it is dirty money or not. The Democrats were caught -- and oh aren't they wonderful for donating that dirty money to charity. The Post editorial also includes that in the Senate right now is a bill waiting for approval that will force nominees to disclose who their bundlers are. The investigation into the fleeing Hsu should continue, however I feel the attention should be placed on all the other bundlers donating to the party nominees. Hsu was caught, now lets see hsu else will the press will catch.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)