As we all know, our esteemed instructor this semester is leaving us. Professor Burzynski Bullard, or Sue as she is more affectionately known, will be teaching in Nebraska(lucky farmers). I think I speak for my peers when saying that Sue will be missed greatly. Over the course of 8 months my mindset has changed dramatically. In August I stepped foot in Sue's news media management class expecting the worst, a class I could only miss once, where there was an assignment due every class. I expected to loathe the instructor and hate going to the 3 hour lecture. Boy was I wrong. Though the readings got a bit repetitive, the class did not. Never in my J-school adventures had I encountered such an experienced, intelligent, likable professor.
With most professors, it can seem like they are just talking to hear themselves talk, Sue spoke to enlighten her audience. When she thought someone else might be able to say it better, she brought them in. Through various teaching techniques and role playing games her point got across and everyone learned, even if they didn't know they were. Future news media managers were being born, and Sue was the reason.
This class was so well taught that I opened a spot in my schedule to take another of Sue's classes in the Spring, Copy Editing. Now I have no interest in being a copy editor, and although the skills are very useful and will undoubtedly help me one day, I enrolled for one reason and one reason only, to receive 6 hours a week of life lessons and journalism advice from Sue. Again many guest speakers were brought into the classroom to teach us some skills that Sue hadn't experienced, like online editing and headline writing, design, and blogging, and that was well and good. I think the most important knowledge gained from the class was not from these speakers, nor was it from the AP style presentations, but it was from everyday class discussion and real life examples of any and every news situation from Sue.
Sue,
I would like to thank you for this academic year and the immense amount of knowledge you have spent hours handing over to me. You will never know the impact that you have had on my future, my present, and me as a person. I look up to you more than anyone except my parents (sorry), and believe me, they know how honored I am to have been taught by you. I regret that you are leaving MSU as I would have loved to spend more time in the classroom learning from you, heck I might've even gone back and taken 300 just for the hell of it. You are an instructor, a mentor, an idol, and more important than anything else, a friend to me, and for that I am thankful. You've given me more than I could ask for by way of advice and direction. You will forever play a pivitol part in my development as a journalist and as a person. I regret not throwing you a going away party in class, but hopefully you'll be back in the mitten again anyways. I hope to never lose touch with you, whether it be via facebook or e-mail. And in about 5 years, if you need a guest speaker on being a smart ass, call me and I'm there. Thank you again for everything you have given myself, and MSU. To the best J-School prof. at MSU, Nebraska, or anywhere else!
Your Friend,
Josh
Monday, April 28, 2008
Friday, April 25, 2008
One parting thought
So, I graduate in less than a week and I'm headed off to Seattle. Before I take off I'd like to impart something I was someone had told me when I was a freshman. GET INTERNSHIPS! That may seem obvious to some, but the reality is, I think far too many of us don't take advantage of the opportunity to gain professional experience and contacts. I always avoided applying because I didn't think I was good enough and lacked the clips, but there are internships available for all levels of college journalists. I applied to 40 places and had interviews with only four, but I did eventually get one. Despite the shot to my ego, the experience I gain will be well worth the pain of the applying process. And as you go through college your marketability only improves with each additional job you take. So, instead of working that summer job back home at the local gas station, get out and apply for internships. Who knows who'll get back to you, but there are seriously worse things in life than rejection letters.
P.S. This is the site that saved my life when I was looking for a job.
P.S. This is the site that saved my life when I was looking for a job.
Watch out! Citizen journalists are taking your job
I've always been fascinated by the recent trend of citizens submitting their photos and videos to newspapers for publish. CNN does this all the time, calling it their iReport. The Lansing State Journal also did it with their Cedar Fest coverage. I caught this interesting posting in BusinessWeek about it as well. So, the question is, is this a safe policy? Journalists pride themselves on the objectivity training and ethical standards we have hammered into us, so is it safe for a guy off the street to submit content for web publish? Do we know what motives, biases, reasons exist for submitting the content, and is it framed in a skewed light? Will editors soon need to start writing corrections on behalf of their citizen journalists when they blow it? Only time will tell, but personally I think this starts to cross into a gray area with enormous potential for harm.
Branching out in the newsroom
So, today I got my first byline ever. It's not going to win me any Pulitzers, but it was a generous offer by one of our sports editors that I had to take. It really got me thinking, wouldn't it be amazing if more newsroom staffers could become involved in areas of the paper they aren't necessarily familiar with. My top reasons for this are;
A. It gives you a better understanding of how the paper works as a whole. Until you've actually had a story of yours hacked in length so it fits on the page, you really don't really comprehend what you're doing as a designer when you ask, can't we just cut it?
B. It allows you to explore areas of the paper you never gave a chance. Am I going to switch over and become a reporter? Hell no, but I've seen designers, photographers, writers, etc. move around our newsroom and find out they're calling really lies in a field other than what they've previously done.
C. It always makes you more marketable, like this guy. What paper wants to hire someone to write a story, someone else to capture audio of the event, and a third person to take some photos when one person could theoretically take care of it. I'm not saying journalists shouldn't specialize, but instead this provides even more content for the readers that otherwise wouldn't be available.
A. It gives you a better understanding of how the paper works as a whole. Until you've actually had a story of yours hacked in length so it fits on the page, you really don't really comprehend what you're doing as a designer when you ask, can't we just cut it?
B. It allows you to explore areas of the paper you never gave a chance. Am I going to switch over and become a reporter? Hell no, but I've seen designers, photographers, writers, etc. move around our newsroom and find out they're calling really lies in a field other than what they've previously done.
C. It always makes you more marketable, like this guy. What paper wants to hire someone to write a story, someone else to capture audio of the event, and a third person to take some photos when one person could theoretically take care of it. I'm not saying journalists shouldn't specialize, but instead this provides even more content for the readers that otherwise wouldn't be available.
Covering Elections, What Not To Do
There's an interesting story on CNN that found a rising number of voters find the campaign too negative and dull. The story states that roughly two-thirds of those polled say (the campaign has) been “too long" and it’s become “too negative” and more than a third say the race is just “too dull." On the exact page where this story was published are accompanying headlines that state, McCain: 'It's very clear who Hamas wants' in the White House and Clinton, McCain camp fire back over Obama energy remarks.
Is CNN seriously too oblivious to their own articles to see readers are growing tired of the campaign coverage? This appears to be the case, as new stories continue to focus on the "horse-race" that this election has become, neglecting to cover the actual issues, credentials of the candidates, and qualifications for presidency. Perhaps newsrooms need to bury their egos and actually cover what the readers want. The continual coverage of the race from the competition standpoint is simply news for the sake of news.
Is CNN seriously too oblivious to their own articles to see readers are growing tired of the campaign coverage? This appears to be the case, as new stories continue to focus on the "horse-race" that this election has become, neglecting to cover the actual issues, credentials of the candidates, and qualifications for presidency. Perhaps newsrooms need to bury their egos and actually cover what the readers want. The continual coverage of the race from the competition standpoint is simply news for the sake of news.
Top Ten Lists
Sure, everyone loves top ten lists. Top ten pizza places, top ten sitcoms, top ten vodkas. And of course David Letterman and his top ten list every night. They're all just someone's (or a survey of a group's) opinion, which means that not everyone agrees with them. But we love top ten lists, so we keep making them.
Forbes recently came out with a new top ten list, this one for best and worst cities for commuters. Detroit ranked second in the worst category, only behind Atlanta. I had to scratch my head here. Forbes, you're telling me the traffic is worse in Detroit than it is Los Angeles, or Chicago? Or even Boston, where you're an inch away from a crash every time you go down one of the many narrow streets?
Many people from out of state love our efficient and well-planned highway system. The auto industry made us what we are: a street-loving, public transit-shunning sprawl of a metropolis. The study says the counties of metro Detroit use less than five percent on average public transportation, which is a horrid statistic, but that doesn't mean the commute is terrible.
See how angry one top ten list can make a person? Can we stop with them, please?
Another prof. athlete in trouble with marijuana use
Dallas Mavericks forward Josh Howard admitted on a radio show the other day that he does indeed smoke marijuana, primarly in the off season. He adds his name to the list of other athletes who have gotten in trouble with this situation. I understand that athletes do drugs, it is no secret, but why would they go ahead and make that public and take a chance at Deteriorating their reputation.
When one becomes a prof. athlete they are looked up to as role models by kids and others all over. Especially in Howards case, as he is an NBA all star and one of the top players on one of the NBA's most popular team. The ESPN article that relased this news http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3368139, says that Howard will likley be enetred into the NBA's marijuana program, which is designed to keep players clean and require them to take more frequent drug tests. This is just because he decided to mention this in a radio broadcast, as if everyone dosen't already know that not all athletes are drug-free.
Bottom line, if you are a prof. athlete, act the part of a professional and don't do stupid things to tarnish your rep and the leagues rep as well. Get the memo Josh Howard, put the hippie lettuce aside and do your job which is to play basketball and represent your team and the NBA in a positive manner.
http://www.sherdog.net/forums/showthread.php?p=22650315
When one becomes a prof. athlete they are looked up to as role models by kids and others all over. Especially in Howards case, as he is an NBA all star and one of the top players on one of the NBA's most popular team. The ESPN article that relased this news http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3368139, says that Howard will likley be enetred into the NBA's marijuana program, which is designed to keep players clean and require them to take more frequent drug tests. This is just because he decided to mention this in a radio broadcast, as if everyone dosen't already know that not all athletes are drug-free.
Bottom line, if you are a prof. athlete, act the part of a professional and don't do stupid things to tarnish your rep and the leagues rep as well. Get the memo Josh Howard, put the hippie lettuce aside and do your job which is to play basketball and represent your team and the NBA in a positive manner.
http://www.sherdog.net/forums/showthread.php?p=22650315
Woodstock coverage
I was recently reading a Wikipedia.org article on the original Woodstock music festival in August 1969. One of the interesting sub-plots was on how the New York Times chose to play the story. The editors, reportedly, wanted their man on the scene, Barnard Law Collier to frame the event as a giant public nuisance full of shameless music, traffic james and rampant sex and drug use. Nevermind about the legendary gathering of some of the greatest musical artists of the 20th Century, such as Santana, Janis Joplin and Jimi Hendrix among many many other giants of the field.
I guess, as a reporter, it's always important to get your perspective across in the story, regardless of what the old fogies back in the office say.
Original New York Times coverage of the event here.
Facebook TMI
Should the media be able to tap into Facebook for information? Ever since the governor of New York was caught in that hooker scandal, the media has been running photos of girl in question. Now, in East Lansing, MSU police have been tapping into the online networking site for photos and information about the attendees. Is prying into these sites an invasion of privacy? When I signed up, I never agreed to have my information released to media if I was involved in an altercation. I guess this is the new frontier of investigative journalism, I thought it was just a place to meet people.
Fun press event too "uncomfortable"
The White House Correspondents Dinner, a yearly black-tie even in Washington, is one of the few chances journalists and the political elite get to hang out and party without the cares of the world interfering.
There have been memorable ones, such as in 2006 when Stephan Colbert was a little too edgy and was not invited back the following year.
It seems, however that the New York Times has declined this year's invitation, citing concerns that the event is an improper gathering for journalists and sources.
"These events can create a false perception that reporters and their sources are pals, and that perception could cloud our credibility," Spokeswoman Diane McNulty wrote. "It's not worth it."
Check out Editor and Publisher's take on it.
There have been memorable ones, such as in 2006 when Stephan Colbert was a little too edgy and was not invited back the following year.
It seems, however that the New York Times has declined this year's invitation, citing concerns that the event is an improper gathering for journalists and sources.
"These events can create a false perception that reporters and their sources are pals, and that perception could cloud our credibility," Spokeswoman Diane McNulty wrote. "It's not worth it."
Check out Editor and Publisher's take on it.
Immigration status- do we have the right to know?
An article from The Poynter Institute brings up an interesting question when it comes to writing crime stories: Is a person’s immigration status relevant information?
With illegal immigration being a hot-button issue in the United States this question is starting to pop up in newsrooms a lot. Editors now have to deal with it the same way they deal with releasing a person’s race in a crime story. And to that end I think that one’s immigration status should follow the same guidelines as race does: Namely, it is really pertinent to the story to provide necessary information to the reader? If yes, then it is included. If no, then it is left out. Unless the crime might involve a person’s immigration status, the way crimes may be “racially motivated,” it should be left out. Perhaps an illegal immigrant has been in the country for a number of years and is taking the steps needed to become a citizen. It would be a shame for a story to end their chances of becoming a citizen just because an editor felt that immigration status was essentially to the story. In addition, the reader might form their own opinion of the person in the crime story anyway, without having to be told the status of the immigrant.
What do you think? Does the public really have the “right to know” in this case?
With illegal immigration being a hot-button issue in the United States this question is starting to pop up in newsrooms a lot. Editors now have to deal with it the same way they deal with releasing a person’s race in a crime story. And to that end I think that one’s immigration status should follow the same guidelines as race does: Namely, it is really pertinent to the story to provide necessary information to the reader? If yes, then it is included. If no, then it is left out. Unless the crime might involve a person’s immigration status, the way crimes may be “racially motivated,” it should be left out. Perhaps an illegal immigrant has been in the country for a number of years and is taking the steps needed to become a citizen. It would be a shame for a story to end their chances of becoming a citizen just because an editor felt that immigration status was essentially to the story. In addition, the reader might form their own opinion of the person in the crime story anyway, without having to be told the status of the immigrant.
What do you think? Does the public really have the “right to know” in this case?
Mouthpieces for the Pentagon
A report by the New York Times that some military officials, retired or not, that have been appearing on television and in other media outlets to talk about the Iraq war have been fed information has led to the Pentagon halting the procedure.
The Times piece seemed to imply that the officals were hyping key decisions made by the Administration and the Pentagon.
Question: Should we now take everything these military guys say with a grain of salt? Often they make statements that seem to contradict Bush and the Pentagon. I'm sure this can't be a new phenomenon, but have the house "military analysts" denegrated themselves to the level of the lobbyist or party operative.
For a military perspective on this, check out the Stars and Stripes article.
Rev. Jeremiah Wright: The Race Card (Part 2)
By know most people are familiar with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama's former pastor who many felt said disparaging remarks against this country. Since Rev. Wright will speaking in Detroit before the NAACP on Sunday the Detroit Free Press ran a 1A below the fold centerpiece on the controversy entitled "Wright and wrongs." With a lede that connects Wright to the major sentiments throughout city of Detroit as being "honest, gritty, and provocative, battered but resilient, and unapologetic black and proud," the author Suzette Hackney paints a picture that is not displayed much in media.
The reality is that for almost every African American who has grown up within the city and its embracingly close suburban areas, Wright's comments are nothing new.
I will venture to say for most African American's living in urban areas in this country, who have heard, seen or experienced the ugly head of racism and injustice, this is nothing new also.
Right or wrong, there is a huge majority of black people who have ill will and negative feelings toward this country, these United States of America. The outpour and anger from New Yorkers today will be a testament and example of that.
Furthermore, within the article comments are made about his language not belonging in the pulpit. My question is how, can you dismiss the thousands of black religious leaders who agree and have been speaking in this manner for years.
As far as future and forthcoming news stories, building from racist remarks by Dog the Bounty Hunter, Don Imus, Michael Richards and even Isiah Washington, then add the fact this is the first time the Democratic party have had two suitably strong front-running minorities toward the White House.
Race is going to get more real, more in your face and controversial than previous years in the media. Things like this, (feelings shared by many blacks but not all) will be pushed to the forefront in the moments to come.
The reality is that for almost every African American who has grown up within the city and its embracingly close suburban areas, Wright's comments are nothing new.
I will venture to say for most African American's living in urban areas in this country, who have heard, seen or experienced the ugly head of racism and injustice, this is nothing new also.
Right or wrong, there is a huge majority of black people who have ill will and negative feelings toward this country, these United States of America. The outpour and anger from New Yorkers today will be a testament and example of that.
Furthermore, within the article comments are made about his language not belonging in the pulpit. My question is how, can you dismiss the thousands of black religious leaders who agree and have been speaking in this manner for years.
As far as future and forthcoming news stories, building from racist remarks by Dog the Bounty Hunter, Don Imus, Michael Richards and even Isiah Washington, then add the fact this is the first time the Democratic party have had two suitably strong front-running minorities toward the White House.
Race is going to get more real, more in your face and controversial than previous years in the media. Things like this, (feelings shared by many blacks but not all) will be pushed to the forefront in the moments to come.
Sticking to what you know
An article from the Detroit Free Press reports that sports radio stations in Detroit are veering away from talking about sports and tending to focus more on the news issues going on.
While this is admirable I think the sports talk stations should stick to what they know best: sports. Many a listener, myself included, turn to sports radio to get away from the issues of the day. That’s what newspapers are for. Granted there are some stations that are news stations, and people should get news from those. But if I turn to a sports station, I want to hear analysis of last night’s Red Wings and Tigers games; not Stony and Wojo’s take on the Kwame Kilpatrick scandal.
Now there are some stations that mix it up a bit, but it’s not devoted to one or the other. A number morning talk shows will interview athletes as well as comment on the issues of the day. What was formerly the “Drew and Mike Show” was good at doing this; they interviewed athletes, but they weren’t above talking to city officials or people of importance.
Or take a show like “The Mitch Albom Show.” After spending two hours a day talking about issues in the news, Albom has an extra hour of his show on Mondays devoted solely to sports.
Talk shows should be able to talk about whatever they want, but it just sounds odd when stations don’t stick to what they do best.
While this is admirable I think the sports talk stations should stick to what they know best: sports. Many a listener, myself included, turn to sports radio to get away from the issues of the day. That’s what newspapers are for. Granted there are some stations that are news stations, and people should get news from those. But if I turn to a sports station, I want to hear analysis of last night’s Red Wings and Tigers games; not Stony and Wojo’s take on the Kwame Kilpatrick scandal.
Now there are some stations that mix it up a bit, but it’s not devoted to one or the other. A number morning talk shows will interview athletes as well as comment on the issues of the day. What was formerly the “Drew and Mike Show” was good at doing this; they interviewed athletes, but they weren’t above talking to city officials or people of importance.
Or take a show like “The Mitch Albom Show.” After spending two hours a day talking about issues in the news, Albom has an extra hour of his show on Mondays devoted solely to sports.
Talk shows should be able to talk about whatever they want, but it just sounds odd when stations don’t stick to what they do best.
Visual thinking continued...
Whether or not print papers stick around is up for debate, but one thing is becoming rather obvious, the web can serve as a holder for information that just isn't possible to convey in any other medium. Audio, video, and interactive graphics are becoming the norm and the New York Times probably is doing the latter better than anyone else out there right now, The results are some intense and deep packages that allow the reader to immerse themselves in information. To achieve this level of success, writers, photographers, graphic designers etc. all need to start thinking visually, regardless of your position in the paper. The focus needs to shift from words counts and great quotes to, what's the best medium for me to communicate my message.
Police not guilty in NY shooting: Is a slanted version better? (Part 1)
Three New York police detectives were found not guilty this morning, under the murder trial of Sean Bell. Bell, 23, died after the three officers, Marc Cooper, Michael Oliver and Gescard Isnora shot a collective round of 5o bullets, hours before his wedding.
The officers who were facing charges of manslaughter were acquitted according to reports by CNN and USA Today. However CNN, also offers video options to discuss what happens next. With leaders such as Al Sharpton involved the issue in this case which falls on social injustice similar to the Jena 6 situation, will undoubtedly receive coverage in the future. It is good judgment to follow-up on whether community outcry will become the next edition to this ongoing saga. Some are even relating this situation to the Rodney King police beating in the '90s, which sparked brutal riots in the Los Angeles area. Some are saying this situation could cause rioting or more violence from the African American community in New York.
Although many people love to associate Al Sharpton with racial injustices, many sources recorded in stories on the trial conclude that it is an issue of race. Many New Yorkers believe Bell and his friends who had just concluded a bachelor party were singled out by the officers, despite the jury's findings. Two of the three of the accused officers were black.
However media such as Black America Web who usually specialize in providing news coverage to and from an African American perspective, doesn't show any signs of bias.
Not that anyone is expecting them too, but the website's article takes a very emotionally graphic spin on the trial. It is emotionally charged and meant to evoke feeling but not very slanted. As opposed to CNN who plays it much safer. What do you think? Is BAW's coverage biased, by emotionally outraged association? Does BAW have the right to pose stories in a slant, and still remain credible?
However check out this Fox News broadcast, concerning the communities reaction before the verdict a while back before the trail who is actually biased?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLti9Yx7d6M
The officers who were facing charges of manslaughter were acquitted according to reports by CNN and USA Today. However CNN, also offers video options to discuss what happens next. With leaders such as Al Sharpton involved the issue in this case which falls on social injustice similar to the Jena 6 situation, will undoubtedly receive coverage in the future. It is good judgment to follow-up on whether community outcry will become the next edition to this ongoing saga. Some are even relating this situation to the Rodney King police beating in the '90s, which sparked brutal riots in the Los Angeles area. Some are saying this situation could cause rioting or more violence from the African American community in New York.
Although many people love to associate Al Sharpton with racial injustices, many sources recorded in stories on the trial conclude that it is an issue of race. Many New Yorkers believe Bell and his friends who had just concluded a bachelor party were singled out by the officers, despite the jury's findings. Two of the three of the accused officers were black.
However media such as Black America Web who usually specialize in providing news coverage to and from an African American perspective, doesn't show any signs of bias.
Not that anyone is expecting them too, but the website's article takes a very emotionally graphic spin on the trial. It is emotionally charged and meant to evoke feeling but not very slanted. As opposed to CNN who plays it much safer. What do you think? Is BAW's coverage biased, by emotionally outraged association? Does BAW have the right to pose stories in a slant, and still remain credible?
However check out this Fox News broadcast, concerning the communities reaction before the verdict a while back before the trail who is actually biased?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLti9Yx7d6M
Thursday, April 24, 2008
NBA Age Limit
The NBA has and NCAA have come into agreement and trying to pass a new rule that college basketball players must stay two years before they can enter the NBA draft.
If this rule does indeed get approved and pass through the NBA players assosiation it would likley be adopted within two years.
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7996718/Sources:-NBA,-NCAA-hope-to-impose-new-age-limit-rule
As of now, the rule is that a player must be 19-years-old before he can file for the NBA draft.
Personally, I think both of these rules are awful. When one turns 18 years old, they are officaly considered an adult. Those who arn't met for college go and work at 18, or else enter the army, navy, marines, ect. So my question is, If you can go work or fight for your country, why cant you eneter the NBA?
It is such a giant waste of time for players to spend a year or two in college when their skills are already far superior to their compeition. It is like these schools are taking kids on a one or two year loan, knowing that their heart isnt in it and when their time is up, theyre out there. Two years is wasted on education towards these kids when they already have made up their minds that they are leaving for the NBA after a year. This is unfair to the kids who are ready and also unfair to the programs who must reload with talent year after year because kids come to school on a one year loan. Here is a column written by someone who agrees with my point here.
http://dailybruin.com/news/2008/apr/01/inba-age-limit-unfair-freshmeni/
I credit Tom Izzo for recruiting solid kids who he knows have talent, but do not plan to jump right to the NBA after a year. If your a program that consistantly recruits top 10 national players, you see those players leave every year and have no true affiliation to their university.
College is the best time of your life. If you want to go to college to play basketball, make it worth while. For those who are ready for the NBA outa college, they should be able to make that jump. Don't force kids to go to college if they dont want/need to be there.
-Sean Merriman
If this rule does indeed get approved and pass through the NBA players assosiation it would likley be adopted within two years.
http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/story/7996718/Sources:-NBA,-NCAA-hope-to-impose-new-age-limit-rule
As of now, the rule is that a player must be 19-years-old before he can file for the NBA draft.
Personally, I think both of these rules are awful. When one turns 18 years old, they are officaly considered an adult. Those who arn't met for college go and work at 18, or else enter the army, navy, marines, ect. So my question is, If you can go work or fight for your country, why cant you eneter the NBA?
It is such a giant waste of time for players to spend a year or two in college when their skills are already far superior to their compeition. It is like these schools are taking kids on a one or two year loan, knowing that their heart isnt in it and when their time is up, theyre out there. Two years is wasted on education towards these kids when they already have made up their minds that they are leaving for the NBA after a year. This is unfair to the kids who are ready and also unfair to the programs who must reload with talent year after year because kids come to school on a one year loan. Here is a column written by someone who agrees with my point here.
http://dailybruin.com/news/2008/apr/01/inba-age-limit-unfair-freshmeni/
I credit Tom Izzo for recruiting solid kids who he knows have talent, but do not plan to jump right to the NBA after a year. If your a program that consistantly recruits top 10 national players, you see those players leave every year and have no true affiliation to their university.
College is the best time of your life. If you want to go to college to play basketball, make it worth while. For those who are ready for the NBA outa college, they should be able to make that jump. Don't force kids to go to college if they dont want/need to be there.
-Sean Merriman
Help sell your story by thinking visually
Reporters need to think visually if they want their stories to be played well and read by more people. As Monica Moses said in a Poynter Institute article "90 percent of readers enter pages through large photos, artwork, or display type." Running a visual element with a story makes it three times more likely that readers will look at the story. And now that online allows reporters to tell stories in many different ways, it's even more important to think about visual ways to tell your story. Brainstorming with photographers and videographers early is essential, say Chris Farina and David Coates, who both shoot and edit video for detnews.com
Wright isn't necessarily Wrong
Over the past month we the voting public have been inundated with the Reverend Wright controversy and the ensuing media feeding frenzy over whether Obama should 'adequately distance' himself from the comments made by Wright. But what we haven't actually gotten is the speech itself, besides the short soundbite pulled out and played ad nauseum ever since, where Wright says "God damn America" and a range of other passionate comments.
And it just happened again, because the FOX interview team went out after an associate of Mr. Wright, Reverend Michael Pfleger.
Now, this shows a five second clip of Pfegler lambasting the FOX reporter, and is followed by a five minute discussion of whether the priest should be sanctioned by the catholic church! And through the entire thing they didn't show any more of the interview, didn't even repeat the first clip.
Here's the full interview, in which the reverend absolutely destroys the reporter on every question he asks.
If you watch this closely, you will see how hard it was for FOX to find any other clips worth using. And you'll also see how hard the reporter worked to push Pfegler into giving a controversial statement. But Pfegler wasn't biting.
And it just happened again, because the FOX interview team went out after an associate of Mr. Wright, Reverend Michael Pfleger.
Now, this shows a five second clip of Pfegler lambasting the FOX reporter, and is followed by a five minute discussion of whether the priest should be sanctioned by the catholic church! And through the entire thing they didn't show any more of the interview, didn't even repeat the first clip.
Here's the full interview, in which the reverend absolutely destroys the reporter on every question he asks.
If you watch this closely, you will see how hard it was for FOX to find any other clips worth using. And you'll also see how hard the reporter worked to push Pfegler into giving a controversial statement. But Pfegler wasn't biting.
The Sports Guy
If anyone of my fellow sports fans out there are still oblivious to the Sports Guy on ESPN's Page 2, I will enlighten you. The Sports Guy or Bill Simmons, has been a columnist for ESPN for the better part of the decade and is one of the only sports journalists I enjoy reading. Bills witty analysis, theories, and mail bags are some of the most enjoyable material on the web for any sports fan. His mail bag shows just how diverse and crazy his fan base is. He writes several columns a week which only adds to his appeal, as theres almost always something new to read. I cannot say enough about how enjoyable the Sports Guy is to read, some of his best stuff is found far into the archives. If I have one idol as an aspiring sports journalist, it is by far Bill Simmons. I encourage anyone who cares about sports to give him a read.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
How can reporters get multi-media?
In today's job market, while newspapers are suffering. The biggest plus to a print resume right now is online, broadcast or multimedia experience. U of C Berkeley, Knight Digital Media Center suggests the term is all emcompassing. Yet it seems difficult at times for print reproters to think within the vast and creative world of video or audio, but I don't think its as hard as people make it out to be. Carrying a video or voice recorder maybe as simple as sketching notes down on paper. It helps back up notes and adds interesting elements to an online package like no other. Learning mutimedia reporting is really the wave of the future since, online is merging all these journalistic worlds into one. There is a good chance that being the most creative in-depth reporter would be even better if multimedia aspects were used to enhance the story-telling. It might be easier than you think.
Reasonable or Frivolous?
Yahoo reported today the Chicago Bulls' mascot has come under the fire for doing his job. The Chicago Sun Times has even picked up the story. On February 12, it was said Benny the Bull was shucking and jiving for the crowd during a Bulls game and went running through the crowd giving the spectators high-fives and hyperextended one man's arm. It kind of seems if you are going to take a high-five from a seven-foot bull something like this may just happen.
I have given numerous high-fives in my 22 years and I have noticed, like many things, it takes two to high-five. When you get hurt in the process, the blame shouldn't be put onto the other for hurting you. You just deal with it. You want to high-five someone who looks like they may out of control that is your choice. I am pretty sure the bull would not threaten the man's life if he didn't give him a high-five.
I find this to be very frivolous. I hope it is only a rumor and will go away because it is stupid. It is showing a trend most people tend to follow: choose to do something and when they get hurt, in the process, blame it on the person that was participating with them so they don't have to realize what they did wasn't the best idea they have ever come up with.
Get over yourself and realize you made a mistake and move on. I mean, c'mon, they guy stayed the rest of the freaking game and HE was the one to initiate the high-five. Really? He is suing for a high-five gone wrong. Something that is clearly his fault.
I have given numerous high-fives in my 22 years and I have noticed, like many things, it takes two to high-five. When you get hurt in the process, the blame shouldn't be put onto the other for hurting you. You just deal with it. You want to high-five someone who looks like they may out of control that is your choice. I am pretty sure the bull would not threaten the man's life if he didn't give him a high-five.
I find this to be very frivolous. I hope it is only a rumor and will go away because it is stupid. It is showing a trend most people tend to follow: choose to do something and when they get hurt, in the process, blame it on the person that was participating with them so they don't have to realize what they did wasn't the best idea they have ever come up with.
Get over yourself and realize you made a mistake and move on. I mean, c'mon, they guy stayed the rest of the freaking game and HE was the one to initiate the high-five. Really? He is suing for a high-five gone wrong. Something that is clearly his fault.
The way to America's Heart: Waffles
Well, despite Obama's loss in Pennsylvania, he is still looking like the favored candidate. But maybe not because he seems to strongest or most competitive. During crunch-time in Pennsylvania, he dined on waffles and Philly cheese steak sandwiches. His approach has been to be personable, and when he does that, it seems to work for him. The interesting thing about Obama is that he has a sort of underdog attitude, and Hillary has just been perpetuating it. In a New York Times article referring to Pennsylvania and Ohio, she said, "It’s very hard to imagine a Democrat getting to the White House without winning those states."
She's the strong, tough hard-on-everyone candidate. She's as tough on another Democrat as she is on McCain. Actually, she might be giving Obama an even harder time.
Obama, on the other hand, has been winning America's heart by being different. The fresh face of politics. And, quite frankly, Hillary's bullying might just make Obama even more appealing, as the underdog who just keeps getting pushed around by the Clintons.
But Maureen Dowd of The New York Times writes in her column that maybe this inability of Obama to assert himself could translate into his role in office. Would we really want a president who can be so easily pushed around by the big names in Washington?
She's the strong, tough hard-on-everyone candidate. She's as tough on another Democrat as she is on McCain. Actually, she might be giving Obama an even harder time.
Obama, on the other hand, has been winning America's heart by being different. The fresh face of politics. And, quite frankly, Hillary's bullying might just make Obama even more appealing, as the underdog who just keeps getting pushed around by the Clintons.
But Maureen Dowd of The New York Times writes in her column that maybe this inability of Obama to assert himself could translate into his role in office. Would we really want a president who can be so easily pushed around by the big names in Washington?
Inside Polygamy
As we mentioned in class, the wives in the West Texas polygamy sect spoke on Larry King Live in what looked to me like an effort to get outsiders to have a look in at their lives to see that they are "normal". This included a tour of the compound and individual rooms, as well as a plea to the courts to have their children back. To me, their appearance had the reverse effect. Their speech was without emotion, their faces were drawn and I did not see much, if at all, of the humanity I was looking for in these women. To me, they seemed brainwashed, and instead of negating my views of polygamist sects, it confirmed what I have already known and studied in classes such as my freshman ISS course on cults. Their "tour" showed several rooms that held bunk beds for 7-10 people, with a portrait of their "father" hanging in each room, as if he is watching over them always. Sometimes I think that public appearances can help groups that are less understood by the majority, but in this case, I think it did more harm than good for these women.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
It's All About Tiger
Last weekend, semi-heralded Trevor Immelman of South Africa won the Masters by three shots over Tiger Woods. Even though Woods finished in second place, he never truly threatened Immelman during the final round. The three-shot margin between them at the end of the day was the closest that Woods had gotten to the lead throughout the final round.
While Immelman didn't play outstanding in the final round, shooting a 3-over-par 75, he was without a doubt the best golfer throughout the entire tournament. He had at least a share of the lead after every round and three of his four rounds were in the 60s.
Despite Immelman's solid performance, Woods not winning the tournament was just as big if not a bigger story than Immelman's play. Sports reporters debated whether it was a case of Immelman winning the tournament or Woods losing the tournament. Probably the biggest story of the entire week was Woods getting knee surgery in the days following the Masters.
This just shows how big Woods is in the game of golf. Every event in the sport is brought back to how Woods affected it or how it affects Woods.
While Immelman didn't play outstanding in the final round, shooting a 3-over-par 75, he was without a doubt the best golfer throughout the entire tournament. He had at least a share of the lead after every round and three of his four rounds were in the 60s.
Despite Immelman's solid performance, Woods not winning the tournament was just as big if not a bigger story than Immelman's play. Sports reporters debated whether it was a case of Immelman winning the tournament or Woods losing the tournament. Probably the biggest story of the entire week was Woods getting knee surgery in the days following the Masters.
This just shows how big Woods is in the game of golf. Every event in the sport is brought back to how Woods affected it or how it affects Woods.
Murdoch's mistake?
When Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation bought The Wall Street Journal, many people feared that Murdoch would put pressure on the Journal to slant its coverage towards his political interests. What they didn't seem to consider is that Murdoch might make a bigger mistake- striking right at the Journal's heart.
According to The New York Times, Murdoch wants to make the Journal into a general interest newspaper, to compete directly with the Times. All right- until you consider that on the whole, general interest newspapers are losing subscribers. Publications that target smaller, more specific audiences, however, seem to be relatively stable, as in the magazine world or certain Web sites. The Journal has a core following of people interested in business news, and to change the format is to risk alienating loyal subscribers. That may be the mistake no one saw coming.
Immigration's Next Border
In an election year, immigration has become the topic du jour. But the debate has now made its way to newsroom ethics discussions. Mizanur Rahman of the Poynter Institute wrote a story Monday about the debate over including a suspect's immigration status in crime stories.
In border states with many illegal immigrants, he said it has become common practice to check a person's citizenship before publishing anything. In an Arizona Republic article, Phoenix authorities said every crime suspect will be asked their immigration status.
But if the suspect is illegal, should that be published? Is that information necessary, or does it overstep the journalist's role?
Well, even immigration editors are grappling with this new situation. The comments on this story show that this new debate might become the next uncomfortable topic in newsrooms.
In border states with many illegal immigrants, he said it has become common practice to check a person's citizenship before publishing anything. In an Arizona Republic article, Phoenix authorities said every crime suspect will be asked their immigration status.
But if the suspect is illegal, should that be published? Is that information necessary, or does it overstep the journalist's role?
Well, even immigration editors are grappling with this new situation. The comments on this story show that this new debate might become the next uncomfortable topic in newsrooms.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Obama peeves Philadelphia gays
The Philadelphia Gay News was ranckled a couple of weeks ago when Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama refused to answer their request for an interview.
Hillary Clinton agreed to talk to the publication, and the editors were planning a side by side treatment of the two interviews.
I found it interesting, pointed out to me by CNN (this is not a paper I pay attention to, how the paper treated Obama's refusal to talk to them - They just left the space alotted for Obama blank.
Bloggers: hilarious comedians!
Every time I read a blog post ripping into ABC's recent Democratic debate, the blogger seems to delight in referring to moderator George Stephanopoulos as "Snuffleupagus," "Stephalupagus," or some variation thereof.
Hey bloggers! We get it, ok?! He's got a weird name! Like that mammoth from Sesame Street! Enough already! This joke has been beaten into the ground.
And maybe I'm being a bit sensitive about this, but isn't that nickname sort of offensive as well? The man is Greek, and Greek people sometimes have long names ending in "opoulos."
Does he deserve to be made fun of for that? Snuffleupagus is like a nickname that the elementary school bully would assign him on the playground.
Maybe I just expect too much from the citizen press.
Teamwork in newsrooms
Working in a newsroom often means working in teams. As a reporter, you may work with other reporters or photographers on a story. Designers and copy editors work with reporters, photographers, graphic artists and line editors. An article on Poynter's website by Ron Reason suggests the best projects result when writers, editors and designers work together. And Cindy Lacy, news design director at The Detroit News, says she's learned the art of compromise as a page designer and manager. Often, she says, there is a lot of give and take as a page comes together.
Pain at the pump could get ugly
Its old news that gas prices in Michigan and beyond is rising like morning sun. With prices in Michigan fairing around $3.50 per gallon, people are feeling the pain at the pump pretty hard. The Detroit Free Press had an interesting piece in today’s paper entitled “Dearborn to consider penalty today for those who steal gas” by staff writer, Eric D. Lawrence. The story took an incident where a man started the pump at a Dearborn (city right outside Detroit) gas station, and after filling he actually went inside to buy a bottle of Pepsi with his fuel purchase. He claimed to have left his wallet in his vehicle (actually leaving the Pepsi on the counter) and drove off. Granted the card he attempted to pay for the gas and soda was declined, but the story takes it a step further. It was not the average news guy steals gas angle. Nor was it the gas is really (really) high and people are pissed angle. It combined both with a touch of misconceptions that people think rebelling against gas stations will send the message that prices are damaging pockets. Lawrence goes to delete the misconception that actions like stealing gas only hurt the gas station and the attendant working than Big Oil, where as those employees must pay the cost where drive-offs ensue. People have suggested everything from organizing a boycott on particular days to abstain from buying gas to vandalizing stations. Other suggest Big Oil companies will feel the pain we have when we fill, unless we boycott whole companies until they dry up. Either way as economic conditions continue to slide downhill, this may become a trend in reporting. What is seemingly a half page, three-column article, gives an interesting outlook on people’s actions and the perception to an ongoing crisis. Good Job Eric!
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Is this really published?
I was glancing around on CNN.com today and clicked on a sad story about a father who was caught in gun crossfire while walking into a store with his two sons and was killed. I think these types of stories demand good reporting, good writing. The town where the incident happened was in Joliet, a very small town, so naturally people who would know the father would be reading it. We talk in class about knowing your readers and how to write for them. After reading the first three paragraphs of the story, I had no idea what it was about except for the specific headline. This is just a specific example of knowing how to write for an audience, and showing there is a need to care about your topic. If you are not interested, your writing will be hurt and it will bring down the entire article.
Virginia Tech anniversary coverage shows progress, memorial
When looking through the coverage of the Virginia Tech shooting one-year anniversary, it seemed two angles were shown. Most obviously, there were plenty of meaningful and touching memorials to the events of that day. Papers showed a town in reflection, and wounds that still had not healed. They showed photographs of the campus in remembrance of their friends lost. The tributes were stunning and a beautiful way show the positive that came out of the tragedy, the unity among the students, faculty. and community.
The second I noticed was more like a report card not just for Virginia Tech, but for universities around the country. Papers were "checking in" to see how other schools have been handling situations involving safety and depressed students on their campuses. Most notably, was the story of one student at Virginia Tech who committed suicide months after the tragedy, traumatized by what he had witnessed and feeling ignored by the school.
Both are necessary angles and appropriate to the event, clearly, one positive and one that could be taken either way.
The second I noticed was more like a report card not just for Virginia Tech, but for universities around the country. Papers were "checking in" to see how other schools have been handling situations involving safety and depressed students on their campuses. Most notably, was the story of one student at Virginia Tech who committed suicide months after the tragedy, traumatized by what he had witnessed and feeling ignored by the school.
Both are necessary angles and appropriate to the event, clearly, one positive and one that could be taken either way.
A Reminder of Power
As I researched the infamous Sam Sheppard murder case these past few weeks for one of my classes, I'm reminded of the enormous power that journalists hold in their hands.
Sheppard was convicted of killing his wife in 1954 after a trial that was deemed a media circus. Newspapers ran headlines flat out accusing Sheppard of killing his wife, and prodded authorities to arrest and charge him with the murder- before and during his trial. The jury was not sequestered during the time of the trial, nor were they directed to ignore the media influence. Sheppard was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. Sheppard eventually received a new trial based off of media influencing the trial, and he was ultimately found not guilty and released. A judge in the case even said "If there ever was a trial by newspaper, this is a perfect example."
It makes you realize the power words can have on people, and what can be at stake. I'm not saying that Sheppard was or wasn't actually guilty, but the fact remains media had a huge impact on the perceptions of those deciding his fate. Media has influenced other trials as well, such as the O.J. Simpson case and Fatty Arbuckle scandal. The power journalists hold with their words must be wielded fairly.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Reporting or gatekeeping?
I was reading CNN's coverage of a Democratic debate held recently in Philadelphia, and was struck as much by the structure of the article as the content. The "real" issues, such the war in Iraq and taxes, weren't mentioned until the last third.
The structure makes sense, I suppose, if you consider CNN's report that half the debate was spent bickering over comments that made a big splash. Technically, CNN was just reporting what happened.
What I wonder, though, is if the press isn't getting a little too far away from its traditional gatekeeper role. We paraphrase quotes, and cut self-serving information from press releases. Is it just as logical for us to place the information that people most need for making their decisions at the top of our articles, even if that information didn't dominate the debate? What do you think?
Networking can pay off when you need a job
Most students who job shadow a professional reporter or copy editor - a requirement of the beat reporting class - come back with a better sense of what the career is really like. But they also have a chance to network with reporters and editors, who can be valuable contacts as they search for internships or jobs. The key is using those resources by staying in touch. Free Press copy editor and blogger Oneita Jackson was not a journalism major when she went to Howard University. And as someone who graduated at 32, she learned the hard way to take advantage of the resources - from professors to classroom speakers - the university setting offers. You'll find that most professionals, as Oneita suggests, are willing to mentor or lend a hand to students who want to succeed as journalists. Are you taking advantage of the networking opportunities you've had this year? Have you followed up with any of the speakers you've had in your classes?
Friday, April 18, 2008
Everybody has a story. Even journalists.
The Newseum, 555 Pennsylvania Ave. in Washington, D.C. opened Tuesday, sharing the stories behind the news industry. The museum has interactive exhibits, and lets visitors walk through the "first rough draft of history."
And it's opening did not lack media coverage. Even Bloomberg covered the Newseum's opening, and discussed its mission to re-atain journalism's credibility.
The intent of the Newseum is to remind people of the past and raise public awareness about the newspaper industry. But some journalists are worried that the public might not buy into the message, according to Steve Myers of the Poynter Institute.
Only time will tell if the Newseum makes any true difference in public perception of the media. For now, here are some visitor's reactions to the exhibits, courtesy of a Poynter Institute video.
And it's opening did not lack media coverage. Even Bloomberg covered the Newseum's opening, and discussed its mission to re-atain journalism's credibility.
The intent of the Newseum is to remind people of the past and raise public awareness about the newspaper industry. But some journalists are worried that the public might not buy into the message, according to Steve Myers of the Poynter Institute.
Only time will tell if the Newseum makes any true difference in public perception of the media. For now, here are some visitor's reactions to the exhibits, courtesy of a Poynter Institute video.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Trust me: Beat reporters need to develop good sources
Gaining the trust of your sources is critical to succeeding as a beat reporter. In a guide for new beat reporters, John Rains, a writing coach in North Carolina, says your sources need to know your word is good. That may mean not over-promising what you will keep off the record, for instance. Christine MacDonald, a beat reporter at The Detroit News, suggests thinking of the relationship with a source as a two-way street. And most importantly, she says treat people with respect. They'll be more apt to help you when you need it. Beyond developing good sources, you also need to know where to go for information when you are new to a beat. Check out the power reporting guide to beats created by Bill Dedman, an investigative reporter for msnbc.com
The future of journalism?
I couldn't believe what I was reading. Apparently, the Los Angeles Daily Journal eliminated its entire copy desk. In a story on the LA Observed Web site, the Daily Journal made the staff cut in an already-sparse newsroom.
I just wonder how this move speaks for the paper's commitment to excellence. How can a newspaper function without a copy desk? Isn't journalist's first obligation to the truth? An article on the Committee of Concerned Journalists Web site discusses how the objectivity standard has become clouded recently. If there are fewer eyes looking over an article for errors and possible bias, how can truth and fairness prevail in that newsroom? It just seems a little ridiculous to think that reporters can sieve out all their own biases.
It's unfortunate to see tight budget lines infringing so obtrusively on a newspaper's daily functioning.
Journalism job numbers drop again
Rick Edmonds from the Poynter Institute reports that last year, 2,400 journalism jobs were lost, a 4.4 percent decrease. This decrease is even bigger than the one in 2000. News like this may not bode well for freshly graduated journalism majors looking for jobs.
Every time I see articles like these, it really serves as a harsh reality for young journalists like myself. In classes and during guest lectures, journalism students are constantly reminded that newspapers are slowly dying out and that soon everything will be on the Internet. Nowadays it seems that no matter what new ways you use to make stories interesting, there’s always something more that could be done.
This kind of thing really makes me wonder sometimes whether or not there’s a job out there for me when I graduate, and if there is, what kind of job will it be? Every day it seems that newspapers are cutting down the size of their staffs. Edmonds’ article says the number of journalism jobs after the decrease is 52, 600. With all the papers across the nation, that doesn’t seem like a lot. Beats are being consolidated all the time, staffs are shrunk, and the list goes on.
I don’t doubt there will be jobs out there for students like me who will graduate in a few years, but I have to wonder what kind of opportunities will remain if newspaper circulation and the number of journalism jobs continue to decline.
Every time I see articles like these, it really serves as a harsh reality for young journalists like myself. In classes and during guest lectures, journalism students are constantly reminded that newspapers are slowly dying out and that soon everything will be on the Internet. Nowadays it seems that no matter what new ways you use to make stories interesting, there’s always something more that could be done.
This kind of thing really makes me wonder sometimes whether or not there’s a job out there for me when I graduate, and if there is, what kind of job will it be? Every day it seems that newspapers are cutting down the size of their staffs. Edmonds’ article says the number of journalism jobs after the decrease is 52, 600. With all the papers across the nation, that doesn’t seem like a lot. Beats are being consolidated all the time, staffs are shrunk, and the list goes on.
I don’t doubt there will be jobs out there for students like me who will graduate in a few years, but I have to wonder what kind of opportunities will remain if newspaper circulation and the number of journalism jobs continue to decline.
An interesting case of plagiarism
A story that’s caught my eye the in the last week brings up an interesting question of ethics, and that word that no journalist wants to hear: plagiarism.
J.K. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter books filed a copyright lawsuit against Steven Vander Ark, a Michigan man, who planned to publish the Harry Potter Lexicon; essentially a reference book based on Rowling’s Potter novels. It is currently a Web site. Rowling claimed the Lexicon unfairly copies her work, and that the book contains many factual errors.
Vander Ark, a former librarian, and longtime Potter fan, said he just wanted to publish a reference book for fans. Unfortunately Rowling has plans to do the same thing.
This case brings to mind the question of plagiarism, but it raises an interesting question. Is it plagiarism? Yes, Vander Ark is taking the information from Rowling’s books and compiling it into a work of his own (don’t know if he planned on giving Rowling any credit). However, sites like Wikipedia allow people to write anything they want about any subject. Wikipedia does warn readers when something has questionable sources, but no doubt there are hundreds of articles about the world of Harry Potter on Wikipedia, based on information from Rowling’s books and their film adaptations. So, yet again, is that plagiarism?
It’s an interesting debate, especially since journalists are really touchy about using the work of others. Sometimes using just one quote from another source without attribution is enough to get a journalist fired. Then again if the work, be it a newspaper article or a book, is public information that everyone is using, is that plagiarism?
I think Vander Ark is wrong to copy Rowling’s work verbatim, but if Rowling is only doing this so she can make more money from a book, there’s a problem. Maybe the Lexicon can say: by Steve Vander Ark, based on the works of J.K. Rowling. Or maybe Rowling can be paid some royalties from the book sales.
J.K. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter books filed a copyright lawsuit against Steven Vander Ark, a Michigan man, who planned to publish the Harry Potter Lexicon; essentially a reference book based on Rowling’s Potter novels. It is currently a Web site. Rowling claimed the Lexicon unfairly copies her work, and that the book contains many factual errors.
Vander Ark, a former librarian, and longtime Potter fan, said he just wanted to publish a reference book for fans. Unfortunately Rowling has plans to do the same thing.
This case brings to mind the question of plagiarism, but it raises an interesting question. Is it plagiarism? Yes, Vander Ark is taking the information from Rowling’s books and compiling it into a work of his own (don’t know if he planned on giving Rowling any credit). However, sites like Wikipedia allow people to write anything they want about any subject. Wikipedia does warn readers when something has questionable sources, but no doubt there are hundreds of articles about the world of Harry Potter on Wikipedia, based on information from Rowling’s books and their film adaptations. So, yet again, is that plagiarism?
It’s an interesting debate, especially since journalists are really touchy about using the work of others. Sometimes using just one quote from another source without attribution is enough to get a journalist fired. Then again if the work, be it a newspaper article or a book, is public information that everyone is using, is that plagiarism?
I think Vander Ark is wrong to copy Rowling’s work verbatim, but if Rowling is only doing this so she can make more money from a book, there’s a problem. Maybe the Lexicon can say: by Steve Vander Ark, based on the works of J.K. Rowling. Or maybe Rowling can be paid some royalties from the book sales.
Bored of a big story
In the past week, my roommate, classmates and co-workers have all told me the same thing: When is the Cedar Fest coverage going to end!? It's been nearly two weeks since the dubious weekend that returned MSU to ignominy, yet there has been a front page story on The State News each day since. There are two competing trains of thoughts here: One is that there are just too many interesting stories from the university's most eventful night in years that people want to know about (yes, I believe there are people that want to know about a war veteran with PTSD arrested for disorderly conduct and how the "official" Cedar Fest YouTube video creators have offers to make music videos). A second thought is that enough is enough, that any more coverage beyond the more than 25 stories, two videos and photo gallery just adds fuel to a disgraceful fire that everybody wants to see extinguished.
Each point is valid. I believe there is news value in looking at how police responded to the incident in compliance with a 2005 commission's recommendation, even if the story is published a week and a half later. Also, I believe there is room in the newspaper for information regarding those arrested during the festivities (this has been another point of contention in and of itself, one that I believe would be incredibly true if not for the fact that there will be follow-up information throughout the summer that states whether these cases were resolved or dismissed and their result). At the same time, it could be time to let go of the story from the print angle. My solution to this is to maintain online coverage that is posted in The State News' "Cedar Fest Special Coverage" section, with a daily refer to the Web site for continuing Cedar Fest coverage.
Still, this decision on how to approach the next week or so (and probably on how it should have been approached this week) should mostly be dictated by person who picks up the newspaper every day. Ultimately, the question without much of an answer then becomes how do you gauge what readers want to see each day before a newspaper is ever printed. The media has a tendency to take something huge and run a marathon with it, even though some people only want to see a 100 meter dash. From the wardrobe malfunction (don't worry, this is a Poynter link … you won't get fired for clicking on it) to the Howard Dean cackle to the bickering between presidential candidates, the media loves a good story. But do we love one too much?
Special Circumstances?
The past few weeks have provided a few examples of unique situations where a crime normally processed like every other has become big news, because of celebrity or impact in an area. And it leaves one to consider, do circumstances always justify extraordinary coverage?
One of the biggest topics as of late is the media attention those arrested at Cedarfest have been garnering. State News runs updates of arraignments daily in their print, as well as online editions. Cityofeastlansing.com also posts frequent updates on those people arrested, as well as pages containing suspect photos and mugshots of those already arrested.
And just last Monday NBA star Carmelo Anthony was arrested on "suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol." The story of his arrest was plastered all over sports television, radio and internet sites.
These stories call into question the necessity of overwhelming coverage of a crime that in other situations would warrant none. To what degree do circumstances make one person's mistake more important to hear than someone else's? Many have criticized the State News in letters to the editor and in blog posts for the extra attention given to the Cedarfest arrestees when they normally they wouldn't be showcasing those people if it weren't for the situation they were in. Where is that line and what is the value of crossing it?
One of the biggest topics as of late is the media attention those arrested at Cedarfest have been garnering. State News runs updates of arraignments daily in their print, as well as online editions. Cityofeastlansing.com also posts frequent updates on those people arrested, as well as pages containing suspect photos and mugshots of those already arrested.
And just last Monday NBA star Carmelo Anthony was arrested on "suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol." The story of his arrest was plastered all over sports television, radio and internet sites.
These stories call into question the necessity of overwhelming coverage of a crime that in other situations would warrant none. To what degree do circumstances make one person's mistake more important to hear than someone else's? Many have criticized the State News in letters to the editor and in blog posts for the extra attention given to the Cedarfest arrestees when they normally they wouldn't be showcasing those people if it weren't for the situation they were in. Where is that line and what is the value of crossing it?
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Choosing Sides: Va. Tech or the Pope?
On this, the one year anniversary of the Virginia Tech massacre, it seems there is a lot of mixed coverage on the front pages of the nation’s newspapers. You would think an event like this would be on all the front pages, but apparently some editors thought differently. With news of the Pope’s first visit to America on the eve of the anniversary, that news battled the Va. Tech anniversary for space on the front page. It seems a lot of papers went with one or the other.
The Jackson Citizen Patriot went with a Va. Tech story and makes no mention of the Pope’s visit.
The Detroit News went with a story on the Pope, while the Detroit Free Press had neither story on the front page, opting for a story on the Pope’s visit on 4A. Interestingly, the Free Press went with stories on high schoolers building robots and sightings of falcons on the front page; I suppose it all depends on what the editors feel is more appealing to readers.
The State News ran a package of stories; one from the AP and one with student reaction to the incident. The Collegiate Times, Va. Tech’s paper, has several stories on the massacre on its Web site.
The New Jersey Star Ledger went with both stories on the front page, put made the Pope’s visit the top story. The headline on the Va. Tech story is catchy though, more so than most other papers who ran a similar story.
The Richmond Times-Dispatch also ran both, but made the Va. Tech story the centerpiece and ran the names of the victims above the paper’s flag.
The News Virginian did a similar thing, running a big Va. Tech story
I suppose the Va. Tech incident is more relevant around the Upper South, which is why some papers didn’t run anything on it, but it brings up a good question that many editors probably battled with; which story is more important or of greater news value? What do you think?
The Jackson Citizen Patriot went with a Va. Tech story and makes no mention of the Pope’s visit.
The Detroit News went with a story on the Pope, while the Detroit Free Press had neither story on the front page, opting for a story on the Pope’s visit on 4A. Interestingly, the Free Press went with stories on high schoolers building robots and sightings of falcons on the front page; I suppose it all depends on what the editors feel is more appealing to readers.
The State News ran a package of stories; one from the AP and one with student reaction to the incident. The Collegiate Times, Va. Tech’s paper, has several stories on the massacre on its Web site.
The New Jersey Star Ledger went with both stories on the front page, put made the Pope’s visit the top story. The headline on the Va. Tech story is catchy though, more so than most other papers who ran a similar story.
The Richmond Times-Dispatch also ran both, but made the Va. Tech story the centerpiece and ran the names of the victims above the paper’s flag.
The News Virginian did a similar thing, running a big Va. Tech story
I suppose the Va. Tech incident is more relevant around the Upper South, which is why some papers didn’t run anything on it, but it brings up a good question that many editors probably battled with; which story is more important or of greater news value? What do you think?
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
The shield law
John McCain has dealt with enough reporters throughout his political career that he surely knows some of the issues facing the industry. McCain addressed legislation to shield reporters from being legally obligated to disclose confidential sources late last week while on the campaign trail, among other topics. The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed the Free Flow of Information Act of 2007, which shields all confidential sources and documents related to published articles from subpoena. The U.S. Senate also is considering a similar bill, which is slightly less expansive and hasn't yet reached the entire Senate.
As a reporter, it's nice to see the federal government standing up for me (I could be wrong, but I get the feeling that this doesn't happen very much). I am very much in favor of protection and believe this will remove any type of chilling effect the current system had on the industry. But whether you're a reporter or a superhero (which, if you ask me, can be all in one), the mantra that "with great power comes great responsibility" is always in play. As McCain noted, there are examples when publishing stories hurt national security or use sources that aren't accurate or reliable. There is a fine line that the government is entrusting us with, and assuming the Senate and president comply (which might not happen, considering President Bush's track record), it's now our responsibility to act responsibly.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Journalists: Lighten the apologies, you rule
Speaking of the Tupac thing, I was a bit annoyed by the LA Times' apology over that whole mess.
It seems like whenever journalists make a mistake, they have to give the most head-over-heels ridiculous apology they can come up with.
I'm in no way suggesting that the LA Times shouldn't have issued an apology. There's no getting around that. But maybe instead of bending over, offer a more realistic apology. Point out that your paper publishes hundreds of wholly-accurate reports every month, and missteps like this are rare. Reiterate that your purpose is not to titilate or excite, but to provide verified, accurate information.
When bloggers and others criticize the media, they only report on the negative - A misdeed that the mainstream media itself is often accused of. By cowering and wimpering over their mistakes, newspapers are only reinforcing the point that they messed up.
Those forced to apologize should use the opportunity to highlight the positive; if we don't do it, no one else will.
P.S. When bloggers mess up, they sometimes mess up big. Just don't expect them to offer any big apologies about it, though.
It seems like whenever journalists make a mistake, they have to give the most head-over-heels ridiculous apology they can come up with.
I'm in no way suggesting that the LA Times shouldn't have issued an apology. There's no getting around that. But maybe instead of bending over, offer a more realistic apology. Point out that your paper publishes hundreds of wholly-accurate reports every month, and missteps like this are rare. Reiterate that your purpose is not to titilate or excite, but to provide verified, accurate information.
When bloggers and others criticize the media, they only report on the negative - A misdeed that the mainstream media itself is often accused of. By cowering and wimpering over their mistakes, newspapers are only reinforcing the point that they messed up.
Those forced to apologize should use the opportunity to highlight the positive; if we don't do it, no one else will.
P.S. When bloggers mess up, they sometimes mess up big. Just don't expect them to offer any big apologies about it, though.
The smaller role of blogs
I hear a lot of hype about "citizen journalism" and the impending media takeover and so forth. Sorry, but I just don't buy it. From what I've seen, most "citizen journalism" tends to consist of a lot of awful opinion blogs and endless whining about the mainstream media.
But an article on the New York Times today may have eroded my mountainous dislike of bloggers just a bit.
The article is about The Smoking Gun, a website that posts things like the forged documents that the LA Times used for their story on Tupac's murder. Unlike most online news ventures, The Smoking Gun actually DOES investigate and fact-check their content, so I'm inclined to avoid lumping them in with bloggers. But while reading the article, I realized that they can do things the mainstream media can't.
By posting documents like the Tupac ones, they performed a function that may have taken other media groups weeks or months. Because the Smoking Gun performs a specialized function (finding intriguing documents) they're able to perform that function better than a multi-faceted organization.
Blogs can also (sigh) function as a useful critic of the media, a function that didn't previously exist.
I'm not falling in love with blogs here - I still think they're mostly pretty stupid. And the traditional, business-oriented news media wont go away, because there simply is no legitimate replacement for it (despite what a bunch of Linux geeks might think). But I can see how blogs can play small, significant roles that augment the larger practice of journalism.
But an article on the New York Times today may have eroded my mountainous dislike of bloggers just a bit.
The article is about The Smoking Gun, a website that posts things like the forged documents that the LA Times used for their story on Tupac's murder. Unlike most online news ventures, The Smoking Gun actually DOES investigate and fact-check their content, so I'm inclined to avoid lumping them in with bloggers. But while reading the article, I realized that they can do things the mainstream media can't.
By posting documents like the Tupac ones, they performed a function that may have taken other media groups weeks or months. Because the Smoking Gun performs a specialized function (finding intriguing documents) they're able to perform that function better than a multi-faceted organization.
Blogs can also (sigh) function as a useful critic of the media, a function that didn't previously exist.
I'm not falling in love with blogs here - I still think they're mostly pretty stupid. And the traditional, business-oriented news media wont go away, because there simply is no legitimate replacement for it (despite what a bunch of Linux geeks might think). But I can see how blogs can play small, significant roles that augment the larger practice of journalism.
Will you be a journalism pioneer?
Newspapers may be in trouble, but Dr. Dianne Lynch, dean of the Roy Park School of Communications at Ithaca College, says it's a great time to be a journalist. Students may not take traditional career paths. In fact, they may create their own businesses and become entrepreneurial journalists. On the Online News Blog, Paul Bradshaw writes about a student who is doing just that. And here's a list of helpful resources you may want to keep handy if you are considering a venture of your own.
What do you think? Are you hoping to find new ways to use the journalism skills you are learning in J-school.
What do you think? Are you hoping to find new ways to use the journalism skills you are learning in J-school.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
The paparazzi are idiots
Friday a former People Magazine freelance writer filed a law suit against a Hollywood photo agency for wages accumulated from a Heath Ledger video tape of the actor using drugs. The suit states that the $1 million accumulated revenue from the secretly filmed tape should have been forfeited under California law. It accuses Splash News & Picture Agency of paying for cocaine that was allegedly used by two of its photographers in 2006 in persuading Ledger to use. Because of Ledger's widely reported struggles with substance abuse, the photographers filmed Ledger, the tape surfacing after his death earlier this year.
This is a classic case of paparazzi doctoring or setting up drama to report. I've heard of sensationalism, but give me a break. As reporters we are taught to stay authentic with coverage but simultaneously we have been ingrained with the public's right now know. Where is this line drawn? And how do we attempt to prevent actions like these from occurring? Obviously Ledger should have been smart enough to make sure the tape was destroyed. But doesn't this further the public's mistrust of the media. I'm just a reporter but it seems difficult for others to distinguish the difference between a thorough reporter and hounding paparazzi.
This is a classic case of paparazzi doctoring or setting up drama to report. I've heard of sensationalism, but give me a break. As reporters we are taught to stay authentic with coverage but simultaneously we have been ingrained with the public's right now know. Where is this line drawn? And how do we attempt to prevent actions like these from occurring? Obviously Ledger should have been smart enough to make sure the tape was destroyed. But doesn't this further the public's mistrust of the media. I'm just a reporter but it seems difficult for others to distinguish the difference between a thorough reporter and hounding paparazzi.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Why journalism matters
Many people become journalists because they know they can have an impact on people's lives. Their stories can shed light on wrongdoing and help right wrongs. One only needs to read the Pulitzer Prize winning stories in the Washington Post this year - on conditions at Walter Reed Army Hospital and care of Iraq war veterans - to see the kind of impact a journalist can have. Jim Schaefer has been reminded of the public service role a journalist can have, too. He is one of the Detroit Free Press reporters who broke the story of the Detroit mayor's text messages that ultimately led to perjury charges against Kwame Kilpatrick. After the story ran, Schaefer said he heard from many readers who thanked him and the newspaper for telling the story. He never expected the story to have the impact it has. But he does understand the watchdog role of journalists is a critical one.
'March 31, 2008, Baby!!! That is How You Jump Over an Aston Martin'
So while I was at work Friday night into Saturday morning, I decided to look up stuff on YouTube because work is cruel and unusually long and I came across this video of some athlete, namely Kobe Bryant, who apparently decides to jump an Aston Martin to show off his stupid new shoes then running to the camera and screaming: "March 31, 2008, Baby!!! That is How You Jump Over an Aston Martin"
The Bleacher Report said this video was originally released on his own website, kb24.com, Thursday. It became an almost instant hit on Youtube.
But, here is the thing: it shouldn't be news, at all. Really, it shouldn't be. Woohoo! He went and jumped the freaking British equivalent of a Ford Mustang in some funky new featherweight shoe to show me just how ugly they are. YAY! for him.
After the horrific sight of the shoes wore off, this thought slowly crept into mind: "How in the hell did he do that? He is lying, thats fake!" For the next few minutes, I thought I was the only one thinking that there was small probability that Robin, I mean, *cough* *cough* Mr. Bryant could probably pull a stunt like that off alone (key word: ALONE).
I mean, who does that in their spare time?
I thought that maybe I was skeptical because of my obvious dislike for the guy until I saw stories popping up everywhere about this video and it's questionable content: Autoblog, The Bleacher Report and even Yahoo featured it on their "front page" as news.
There is nothing that makes it news but for the questions that circle the video's credibility. This iffy commercial could turn out to be one of the best ad campaign for a nike shoe in a long while.
This video was the best idea because it get people interested and makes it stick in your head because of the outrageousness of it. This really will make people go buy the shoe because they can say "I saw these on YouTube yesterday and now I have a pair."
In so many ways I want to say this video, although cool, is getting way too much coverage. The only possible reason this video is newsy-ish (and that's a big ish) is because of the 'unique' quality of it which you have to look at it in this sense: it isn't every day that you get to see NBA players jumping cars to advertise their shoe.
The Bleacher Report said this video was originally released on his own website, kb24.com, Thursday. It became an almost instant hit on Youtube.
But, here is the thing: it shouldn't be news, at all. Really, it shouldn't be. Woohoo! He went and jumped the freaking British equivalent of a Ford Mustang in some funky new featherweight shoe to show me just how ugly they are. YAY! for him.
After the horrific sight of the shoes wore off, this thought slowly crept into mind: "How in the hell did he do that? He is lying, thats fake!" For the next few minutes, I thought I was the only one thinking that there was small probability that Robin, I mean, *cough* *cough* Mr. Bryant could probably pull a stunt like that off alone (key word: ALONE).
I mean, who does that in their spare time?
I thought that maybe I was skeptical because of my obvious dislike for the guy until I saw stories popping up everywhere about this video and it's questionable content: Autoblog, The Bleacher Report and even Yahoo featured it on their "front page" as news.
There is nothing that makes it news but for the questions that circle the video's credibility. This iffy commercial could turn out to be one of the best ad campaign for a nike shoe in a long while.
This video was the best idea because it get people interested and makes it stick in your head because of the outrageousness of it. This really will make people go buy the shoe because they can say "I saw these on YouTube yesterday and now I have a pair."
In so many ways I want to say this video, although cool, is getting way too much coverage. The only possible reason this video is newsy-ish (and that's a big ish) is because of the 'unique' quality of it which you have to look at it in this sense: it isn't every day that you get to see NBA players jumping cars to advertise their shoe.
Friday, April 11, 2008
I've come to like Stuff White People Like!
We've all heard of Perez Hilton by now right? He was the first big name that I can think of that was discovered in this new age of technology off of a blog. His humorous site made it in the big time after he generated a swarm of followers who couldn't live without hearing what he had to say next about celebrities.
A new article in TIME Magazine pointed me towards the next person to make it big out of the blogging world. The blog called Stuff White People Like, has now been picked up by Random House Inc. for a book deal. The author writes in a very factual manner about different characteristics that white people have and things that white people like to do. After reading several of his entries for myself I've come to like this blog and can see why his site has been visited by over 22 million people in just under a few months.
This just goes to show that there can be some kind of career options in blogging like Dr. Dianne Lynch told us in class on Thursday. Or at least for those people who have something witty to say and can generate a steady audience.
A new article in TIME Magazine pointed me towards the next person to make it big out of the blogging world. The blog called Stuff White People Like, has now been picked up by Random House Inc. for a book deal. The author writes in a very factual manner about different characteristics that white people have and things that white people like to do. After reading several of his entries for myself I've come to like this blog and can see why his site has been visited by over 22 million people in just under a few months.
This just goes to show that there can be some kind of career options in blogging like Dr. Dianne Lynch told us in class on Thursday. Or at least for those people who have something witty to say and can generate a steady audience.
Who's the expert now?
After Thursday's class where Dr. Dianne Lynch, dean of the Roy Park School of Communications at Ithacca College, spoke about new media I stumbled across a blog that spoke about the idea of collective intelligence that she touched on in class. Lynch touched on this idea, referring to it as Citizen Media or Citizen Journalism. The blog called New Media Mogul, the research blog of Hugh R. Macdonald, discussed the issue as a hotly debated topic amongst anyone who is interested in new media.
The blog explains that in its basic form collective intelligence is the idea that everyone has a contribution to make and when combined those contributions can create a quality product. This idea Macdonald says is a very controversial topic. We've seen this through sites like Wikipedia were anyone came contribute to the online encyclopedia, and yet the information has so far proven to be pretty accurate. Plus when it's not it can be edited by someone who knows the topic better.
So what happens when this enters the journalism field? Are journalists out of a job because citizens are doing all the reporting? Lynch discussed in class how some journalists are worried about this kind of transformation because we are supposed to be the experts on things. They worry that we will become less credible or not needed if the public decides that they can get the same news from an average Joe on the Internet. Macdonald says in his blog entry that citizen journalism has already proved that it can cover some issues more effectively than the mainstream media, mainly because of the limited time that the mainstream media can devote to any one issue.
I found Macdonald's view to be very interesting, so if your interested in this new topic of citizen journalism you should take a look at his blog.
The blog explains that in its basic form collective intelligence is the idea that everyone has a contribution to make and when combined those contributions can create a quality product. This idea Macdonald says is a very controversial topic. We've seen this through sites like Wikipedia were anyone came contribute to the online encyclopedia, and yet the information has so far proven to be pretty accurate. Plus when it's not it can be edited by someone who knows the topic better.
So what happens when this enters the journalism field? Are journalists out of a job because citizens are doing all the reporting? Lynch discussed in class how some journalists are worried about this kind of transformation because we are supposed to be the experts on things. They worry that we will become less credible or not needed if the public decides that they can get the same news from an average Joe on the Internet. Macdonald says in his blog entry that citizen journalism has already proved that it can cover some issues more effectively than the mainstream media, mainly because of the limited time that the mainstream media can devote to any one issue.
I found Macdonald's view to be very interesting, so if your interested in this new topic of citizen journalism you should take a look at his blog.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Californian J-School Teachers are Free!
A state senate panel in California agreed high school and college journalism teachers should be protected against unreasonable censorship and punishment for hart-hitting stories.
"Allowing a school administration to censor in any way is contrary to the democratic process and the ability of a student newspaper to serve as the watchdog," Sen. Leland Yee of San Francisco said.
In my younger years after my high school's newspaper staff published stories criticizing administration, the not-so-well-liked principal made us give our finished pages to him to review before they went to the printer. So he'd scan the paper for his name and sign it off if everything looked OK. Other aspiring journalists had the same experience.
Perhaps the most important part of journalism, if you ask me, is freedom of the press. Censoring high school and college media is teaching the wrong lesson to our future reporters.
"Allowing a school administration to censor in any way is contrary to the democratic process and the ability of a student newspaper to serve as the watchdog," Sen. Leland Yee of San Francisco said.
In my younger years after my high school's newspaper staff published stories criticizing administration, the not-so-well-liked principal made us give our finished pages to him to review before they went to the printer. So he'd scan the paper for his name and sign it off if everything looked OK. Other aspiring journalists had the same experience.
Perhaps the most important part of journalism, if you ask me, is freedom of the press. Censoring high school and college media is teaching the wrong lesson to our future reporters.
News shake-up at CBS
Two reports released in the past two days seem to signal major changes in the works at CBS News.
The first, reported by the New York Times news service, says that CBS is in "intense" negotiations with CNN to marry the two company's news gathering operations.
The second, published variously in the New York papers, says Katie Couric's days (due to lousy ratings) at CBS are numbered and she could be out of the anchor position by the time we have a new president.
The story does say that the report may have been planted to give Couric either better leverage in contract negotiations or to smoothly transition her out of the anchor chair to a regular stint on 60 Minutes.
Apparently the former home of news pantheon members Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow seem to moving in a direction other networks aren't. They seem to be realizing that a personality-driven half-hour evening newscast is simply a relic of another era - people don't really lend it much credence.
Also they are willing, as many websites and blogs do, to move toward expansion of content rather than expansion of coverage. Meaning, just as we hyper-link to other stories to give our readers more context and follow-up, a CBS/CNN deal may be a similar concept.
The first, reported by the New York Times news service, says that CBS is in "intense" negotiations with CNN to marry the two company's news gathering operations.
The second, published variously in the New York papers, says Katie Couric's days (due to lousy ratings) at CBS are numbered and she could be out of the anchor position by the time we have a new president.
The story does say that the report may have been planted to give Couric either better leverage in contract negotiations or to smoothly transition her out of the anchor chair to a regular stint on 60 Minutes.
Apparently the former home of news pantheon members Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow seem to moving in a direction other networks aren't. They seem to be realizing that a personality-driven half-hour evening newscast is simply a relic of another era - people don't really lend it much credence.
Also they are willing, as many websites and blogs do, to move toward expansion of content rather than expansion of coverage. Meaning, just as we hyper-link to other stories to give our readers more context and follow-up, a CBS/CNN deal may be a similar concept.
Cedar Fest does indeed alter jobs
I went to eat dinner with a friend of mine last night who I work with at the Lansing State Journal. He is a senior at MSU who will be graduating this spring and is in the full-out process of job hunting at newspapers across the country. He applied for a newspaper in Kansas City, I believe it was the Kansas City Star (but dont quote me on that) and that was one of his top choices to work at.
Andrew (my friend) recieved an email Tuesday morning saying that he was no longer in the running for a position at the Kansas City paper because of what happened at Michigan State over the weekend with Cedar Fest.
I figured that Cedar Fest would certinly have effected our universities reputation, but never did I think it would come to this extreme. If he had been arested or on video doing something destructive then maybe I could understand, but the kid wasn't even there.
This is apsolutly outrageous and shouldnt be tolerated.
I can only hope he dosen't leave this instance untouched
-Sean
Andrew (my friend) recieved an email Tuesday morning saying that he was no longer in the running for a position at the Kansas City paper because of what happened at Michigan State over the weekend with Cedar Fest.
I figured that Cedar Fest would certinly have effected our universities reputation, but never did I think it would come to this extreme. If he had been arested or on video doing something destructive then maybe I could understand, but the kid wasn't even there.
This is apsolutly outrageous and shouldnt be tolerated.
I can only hope he dosen't leave this instance untouched
-Sean
Newseum gets a makeover
Months of anticipation will come to an end tomorrow when the Newseum, an interactive (technological nonetheless) museum in downtown Washington, D.C. reveals its beautiful new face (and body...) One who enters the renovated building will first see a 75-foot wall depictment the First Amendment (this includes "freedom of the press" for those unknowing). Admission is free for those around Pennsylvania Avenue as visitors will be treated to refreshments, a 4-D theater experience and much more.
This is a must-see for those journalistically-inclined in Washington, D.C. Fly there if you're far.
A Tradition Unlike Any Other
This week the Augusta National Golf Club hosts its annual tournament, The Masters. The Masters consistently has the highest television ratings of any golf tournament during the year and is the only major championship held at the same golf course every year.
Because of this, Augusta National has always made an attempt to control the media. If you watch CBS golf broadcasts on a regular basis, you notice that the announcers always choose their words very carefully.
The people that have come to watch the golf tournament are not called "fans" or "spectators", they are "patrons". The longer grass that lines the fairways is not "rough", it is "the second cut".
The commentators are always referencing the beautiful azaleas and trademark Augusta roars. Never do they discuss the fact that Augusta National Golf Club doesn't have a female member and only admitted an African-American member just over a decade ago.
One reason that the commentators are so restrained during the broadcasts is that they know what can happen if they stray from Augusta's rules.
Gary McCord, one of the networks most popular golf commentators, has not been allowed to take part in the Masters since 1995. What did McCord say to earn bannishment from The Masters? He once described an errant shot as "landing in the cheap seats" and said that the notoriously fast Augusta greens were not cut, they were "bikini waxed".
Augusta National has become a bit more media friendly in recent years though. There is more live coverage of the tournament on TV, with the first two days of the tournament now on ESPN. They also have live online broadcasting of a few of the holes.
Because of this, Augusta National has always made an attempt to control the media. If you watch CBS golf broadcasts on a regular basis, you notice that the announcers always choose their words very carefully.
The people that have come to watch the golf tournament are not called "fans" or "spectators", they are "patrons". The longer grass that lines the fairways is not "rough", it is "the second cut".
The commentators are always referencing the beautiful azaleas and trademark Augusta roars. Never do they discuss the fact that Augusta National Golf Club doesn't have a female member and only admitted an African-American member just over a decade ago.
One reason that the commentators are so restrained during the broadcasts is that they know what can happen if they stray from Augusta's rules.
Gary McCord, one of the networks most popular golf commentators, has not been allowed to take part in the Masters since 1995. What did McCord say to earn bannishment from The Masters? He once described an errant shot as "landing in the cheap seats" and said that the notoriously fast Augusta greens were not cut, they were "bikini waxed".
Augusta National has become a bit more media friendly in recent years though. There is more live coverage of the tournament on TV, with the first two days of the tournament now on ESPN. They also have live online broadcasting of a few of the holes.
Are you smarter than a 5th grader?
Apparently the Smithsonian is not. Kenton Stufflebeam, a 5th grader from Allegan, Michigan noticed that the "Tower of Time" exhibit at the Museum of Natural History referred to the Precambrian as the "Precambrian era", when "era" is not required after "Precambrian". He has been recognized by several media outlets, such as "The Today Show", for his spot-on correction.
It seems that young children, with the popularity of FOX's game show "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?", have lately been highlighted for their intellect-- something I think is very positive in a world where children and young adults are often portrayed negatively.
Kenton wrote a letter to the museum correcting the error. When they wrote back, he also noticed that they spelled his last name and his hometown incorrectly.
Talk about copy-edit the world!
It seems that young children, with the popularity of FOX's game show "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?", have lately been highlighted for their intellect-- something I think is very positive in a world where children and young adults are often portrayed negatively.
Kenton wrote a letter to the museum correcting the error. When they wrote back, he also noticed that they spelled his last name and his hometown incorrectly.
Talk about copy-edit the world!
Refreshing Comeraderie
Recently while watching SportsCenter I have noticed that the anchors have small conversations with each other that go beyond ad-libbing and sometimes run into highlights. Now I may be in either the minority or the majority in my thoughts, but personally I love that this is happening. I think it shows that these guys are just like their viewers, they love sports, also they love their jobs and their co-workers. It seems like they realize they are living the dream for a lot of sports fans and they appreciate it.
If it took something away from the show, I probably wouldn't support the friend like behavior these anchors exhibit. I feel like they are delivering sports news while not being too serious, sports are, after all, played for fun for the most part. The list of Sportscenter anchors runs 35 deep, and I think that the producers of the show have paired their anchors together very effectively. I don't know if every anchor in the news room are friends with one another, in fact they probably all aren't, but the way they interact with each other on air makes it seem like a wonderful place to work.
If it took something away from the show, I probably wouldn't support the friend like behavior these anchors exhibit. I feel like they are delivering sports news while not being too serious, sports are, after all, played for fun for the most part. The list of Sportscenter anchors runs 35 deep, and I think that the producers of the show have paired their anchors together very effectively. I don't know if every anchor in the news room are friends with one another, in fact they probably all aren't, but the way they interact with each other on air makes it seem like a wonderful place to work.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Journalism as a tool for good
The Pulitzer Prizes were announced earlier this week, and it's a good reminder of why journalism is important. Many of the prizes were awarded for investigative or enterprise reporting that made a difference. The Washington Post won six awards, including one for its expose on treatment of war veterans at Walter Reed. In a piece about the story on the Poynter Institute site, reporter Anne Hull said: "As a journalist you go about your daily work life trying to get a story out or make someone's life better or shine a light on wrongdoing.... The Walter Reed stuff landed with a ferocious wallop. Washington -- Congress, the Pentagon, the White House -- all reacted in dramatic fashion. It was a reminder to everyone in the Post newsroom that journalism is still this mighty tool for good."
Take some time this week to look over the winners and read the good work. The best reporters learn from reading others.
Take some time this week to look over the winners and read the good work. The best reporters learn from reading others.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Online Credibility
A new study found that while editors and readers agree on what makes print journalism credible, they disagree on the online sector.
Seventy percent of editors said everyone should disclose their name before commenting on stories to support trustworthy journalism, but 55 percent of readers want to stay anonymous.
At the same time, 58 percent of editors said allowing journalists to post their opinions online would harm journalism, but only 36 percent of the public agreed.
If you ask me, non-anonymous comments would contribute to reader trust in online journalism, and maybe then blogs would be considered real news.
Seventy percent of editors said everyone should disclose their name before commenting on stories to support trustworthy journalism, but 55 percent of readers want to stay anonymous.
At the same time, 58 percent of editors said allowing journalists to post their opinions online would harm journalism, but only 36 percent of the public agreed.
If you ask me, non-anonymous comments would contribute to reader trust in online journalism, and maybe then blogs would be considered real news.
Princess Diana decision coverage
Well, it has been 10 years since the death of Princess Diana, and the world is still enamored by her death. After six months of deliberation, the jury involved in the inquest into her death ruled that she and Dodi were killed as a result of reckless behavior by the paparazzi and their driver. The decision was applauded by her two sons, Princes William and Harry who said the decision was fair and appreciated the time put in to examining what happened that night.
The question now is, what is to happen to the paparazzi shown to be responsible for endangering lives, and in this most unfortunate case, the loss of two? They should be held accountable for their actions, just as photojournalists are. There are ethics to be considered and becoming a threat to someone's safety is inexcusable. It is refreshing to see that in the UK, where paparazzi and tabloids photographers and reporters are said to be the most vicious, that something is being done to set an example, unfortunately, it cost lives.
The question now is, what is to happen to the paparazzi shown to be responsible for endangering lives, and in this most unfortunate case, the loss of two? They should be held accountable for their actions, just as photojournalists are. There are ethics to be considered and becoming a threat to someone's safety is inexcusable. It is refreshing to see that in the UK, where paparazzi and tabloids photographers and reporters are said to be the most vicious, that something is being done to set an example, unfortunately, it cost lives.
Coverage Burnout?
After the primaries earlier in the year, and all the media coverage they received, many outlets as well as regular people seem to be suffering election burnout.
Earlier in the year, stories ran non-stop about candidates and every quirk or trait they may have. Now it seems the water has cooled down a bit and people are trying to catch their breath or just ignore it until it's time to vote.
CNN.com keeps a political ticker page open with blurbs on candidates, but it's nowhere near the intensity of coverage they had earlier in the year. Blogger Alex Hutchinson feels the burnout and offers his remedies for the average voter here. However, regardless of feelings on it now, rest assured feelings will be aroused again in November- it's just those lean months before then we need to get through.
Tightening his grip?
In the past few months, Zimbabwe President Robert Mugabe has been in and out of the news. His ruling tactics in Zimbabwe have incited a host of responses from both national and local media. The State News in February published an article about Mugabe having an honorary degree from MSU. An editorial was also written.
Then, earlier this week, I saw Mugabe's face on the front page of The New York Times' Web site. As elections are under way in Zimababwe, Mugabe has tightened his grip of power. A Washington Post story reported Mugabe threatening his people, telling them that the opposition party will only make life in Zimbabwe worse.
With all the news happening in the U.S., it's amazing to see this much coverage of an international player. How much difference will media coverage have on Mugabe? It seems as though he has only picked up steam since February.
The advocacy line
There's a fine line in newspapers and other media outlets between reporting on what is newsworthy and advocacy for a certain group (I like to call it "free publicity"). Whenever there is a story published that is sure to be read by more than a few people, there is essentially a sense of advocacy or publicity for that person or group. It seems that groups with a message, most notably, are the ones who seek to gain attention of news organizations (you can't say that we could know Cindy Sheehan if it wasn't for the news coverage surrounding her).
This was most apparent for me when a group of protesters speaking out against the war in Iraq on the 5-year anniversary of the war barricaded the front door of The State News with copies of newspapers, asking they be reprinted because their protest wasn't being covered. Although I thought the littering wasn't the most efficient tactic, their protest of The State News was essentially peaceful. They also followed up the protest with a joint letter that was published in the newspaper.
From the newspaper's standpoint, there is an argument that coverage of the fifth anniversary had been done the previous day since there were two front page stories about the anniversary. Also, it could be argued that the protest organizers, the Greater Lansing Network Against War and Injustice, or GLNAWI, are frequently cited in war protest stories and thus could be receiving free publicity. From the protesters standpoint, the protest was newsworthy and should be represented by those who print the student's voice.
So at what point does a group become too big for its own good, and what role do newspapers have as gatekeepers for such news? There obviously are those who seek media attention and feed off of it, whether for personal ego or advancement of a personal stance on issues. Consequently, there are media sources who acknowledge this desire for the limelight and are then conflicted on how to approach people who gain from publication.
I believe many of these cases are in need of adjudication on a case-by-case basis, but are there any clear guidelines on when news coverage blurs the line with advocacy?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
