OK OK OK - I know that im in school and shoulf probably not be saying this cuz you know ill look incensitive and evil- but i think that anyhing that goes out into the public sphere is public information. when i go on the radio and deliver the news i dont cite where i got it from. when i cite "die standing or live kneeling" i dont have to cite who originally found the quote it was said we all know it we use it.
papers and stations get info off of each other all the time- thats why we report - we want it to go to the public forum
i think this logic can be applied here- she quoted someone and it became part of the public sphere of knowledge
so i do not think the man should have so publicly scorned- think that the people were just looking for a way to get rid of him i mean he was over 80 yrs of age.
however I think that he did not make a "mistake" from his article it seems he is a very arrogant man. he probably did not want to start one of his high class articles with a quote from an undergrad student. I think he was being too arrogant to be careful and that is not a good excuse.
the girl had the right to be mad she did a lot of work and then some pomp-ass arrogant man stole her work and don't see her worthy to credit her-
it was a mean thing to do but i think the consequences were a bit severe- i suspect that there were further provocations
it is almost to nobel of an act for the editor to make- to take a student so seriously over a well established column writer-
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Monday, December 3, 2007
slides
wow Joe Weiss reminds me of an old school gamer- his passion is multi-media jounrnalism is great and hes serious about it.
he has a strong opinion about issues- and he has strong rules of engagment which he takes personally if someone brakes them- he makes people who brake them sound completly inocompetent
ok hes not a weirdo im the same way. if someone brakes the rules of engagment i feel personally insulted.
so maybe i should say that he has a passion about what he does- thats good there is meaning in his life and he helps others
its also interesting that he has such clear cut rules on such a new medium. i think most people see slide sows as a relatively new medium where boundaries are not yet set- but Weiss has clear boundaries. he;s ahead of his ime a dreamer
maybe he will be considered a founding father of mult-media slide show journalism.
he has a strong opinion about issues- and he has strong rules of engagment which he takes personally if someone brakes them- he makes people who brake them sound completly inocompetent
ok hes not a weirdo im the same way. if someone brakes the rules of engagment i feel personally insulted.
so maybe i should say that he has a passion about what he does- thats good there is meaning in his life and he helps others
its also interesting that he has such clear cut rules on such a new medium. i think most people see slide sows as a relatively new medium where boundaries are not yet set- but Weiss has clear boundaries. he;s ahead of his ime a dreamer
maybe he will be considered a founding father of mult-media slide show journalism.
Elections- worst nightmare comes true
In junior high when I was beginning to understand the dynamics of politics I have come to fear that a moment like this may come. When Oprah will get into election debates.
In class before the ’00 elections our social studies teacher held class elections- there were two excersizes- first we had to vote who we think will win- the result was bush 100%.
The next exercise was to vote for who we would like to win- the answers were quite unorthodox ranging from Clinton to Elmo. But there was winner- Oprah.
We had a discussion in class about this – the class came to the conclusion that even though Oprah would have a good chance in winning; she doesn’t run because it is not her place to do so- her role is to critisize society not run it. People in the media should not enter politics.
Disscusions like these were the beginning of my journalistic identity. It is around this same time that I decided I might go into journalism. I may stretch so far as to say- that the idea that people in the media should not go into politics and politicians should not go into the media- was one of the basis on which I became a journalist.
I feel almost betrayed by Operah’s decision to endorse a specific candidate.
In class before the ’00 elections our social studies teacher held class elections- there were two excersizes- first we had to vote who we think will win- the result was bush 100%.
The next exercise was to vote for who we would like to win- the answers were quite unorthodox ranging from Clinton to Elmo. But there was winner- Oprah.
We had a discussion in class about this – the class came to the conclusion that even though Oprah would have a good chance in winning; she doesn’t run because it is not her place to do so- her role is to critisize society not run it. People in the media should not enter politics.
Disscusions like these were the beginning of my journalistic identity. It is around this same time that I decided I might go into journalism. I may stretch so far as to say- that the idea that people in the media should not go into politics and politicians should not go into the media- was one of the basis on which I became a journalist.
I feel almost betrayed by Operah’s decision to endorse a specific candidate.
Monday, November 26, 2007
FOOOOOOOOOOD in the 08 rpes campaign
so one of my fave topics- food came up in the paper
the nyt most have ran out of things to write about so they wrote about the candidate's eating habbits- and anaylized how food can be seen as great judgment of character- if a candidate eats too much and becomes fat their undisciplines- if they refuse food they reject the person serving the food.
they cant eat because their always answering questions.
this ofoucrse simply shows the beuty pagent side of politics- a pagent where the judges are always ALWAYS watching everything EVERYTHING
it makes sense if one of the candidates started eating one of the ethnic food i eat i would emediataly have a soft spot for him or her.
food is so much part of our culture it spills into everything even presidential elections.
but is it fair to assume that a candidate with food allergies is disadvantaged or unqualified?
food alregies have nothing to do with how well a person can run a country but appereantly they have a lot to do with a persons ability to win that position.
why is it that many of the qualities required to win elections have nothing to do with the actual qualities needed for a presidency?
the nyt most have ran out of things to write about so they wrote about the candidate's eating habbits- and anaylized how food can be seen as great judgment of character- if a candidate eats too much and becomes fat their undisciplines- if they refuse food they reject the person serving the food.
they cant eat because their always answering questions.
this ofoucrse simply shows the beuty pagent side of politics- a pagent where the judges are always ALWAYS watching everything EVERYTHING
it makes sense if one of the candidates started eating one of the ethnic food i eat i would emediataly have a soft spot for him or her.
food is so much part of our culture it spills into everything even presidential elections.
but is it fair to assume that a candidate with food allergies is disadvantaged or unqualified?
food alregies have nothing to do with how well a person can run a country but appereantly they have a lot to do with a persons ability to win that position.
why is it that many of the qualities required to win elections have nothing to do with the actual qualities needed for a presidency?
ethic and new media reading- the joy
ok let me say this once and probably many more times- I HATE LEARNING ABOUT EHTICS-
yes i am now suffering through an entire media ethics course and yes i do understand the value of learning ethics and thinking out ethical problems and theories and how they realte to real live decisions before actually getting to the job- but i still hate it-
also becuase the reading was so dispuresed and i dont want to sound like i have drank 50 cups of cofee i will commment on specifics.
one of the articles we had to read said journalism can do a lot but it cant do everything. how true.
however i am concerned with its example. It speaks of the well known sociological experiment that proves that we are more compasionate to a single soul suffering then two or more souls suffering. it praised the nyt for bringing the actual people away from the statistics in darfur to create more compassion among its readers.
now that is defenatly a way of telling a story.it shows whats going on an important part of whats going on but wheres the line between hard core reporting and yellow/propaganda reporting?
Is it a reporters job to evoke emotion in a reader or is it their job to tell the facts. although emotion is many times part of the story i must ask where do we stop.
should a reporter chose what emotions she will try to evoke from a reader or let the story tell itself? without having a agenda to evoke emotion
We must ask this question especially now when it becomes increasingly eawsier to have personal sotries fill the pages of newspaper websites. it wouldnt really cost the paper much to put them there but sould they- or should that be left to bloggers?
yes i am now suffering through an entire media ethics course and yes i do understand the value of learning ethics and thinking out ethical problems and theories and how they realte to real live decisions before actually getting to the job- but i still hate it-
also becuase the reading was so dispuresed and i dont want to sound like i have drank 50 cups of cofee i will commment on specifics.
one of the articles we had to read said journalism can do a lot but it cant do everything. how true.
however i am concerned with its example. It speaks of the well known sociological experiment that proves that we are more compasionate to a single soul suffering then two or more souls suffering. it praised the nyt for bringing the actual people away from the statistics in darfur to create more compassion among its readers.
now that is defenatly a way of telling a story.it shows whats going on an important part of whats going on but wheres the line between hard core reporting and yellow/propaganda reporting?
Is it a reporters job to evoke emotion in a reader or is it their job to tell the facts. although emotion is many times part of the story i must ask where do we stop.
should a reporter chose what emotions she will try to evoke from a reader or let the story tell itself? without having a agenda to evoke emotion
We must ask this question especially now when it becomes increasingly eawsier to have personal sotries fill the pages of newspaper websites. it wouldnt really cost the paper much to put them there but sould they- or should that be left to bloggers?
Monday, November 12, 2007
Radio and tv
Ha- ok although i read this freshman year i am happy that i go to refresh my mind. I work for the radio now and I kinda forgot the basic stuff. I mean I dont think my news updates were that horrible but i think i can better understand them now- I hope class will be equally informative.
Its so weird getting advice in a text book that i can immediately use. Im so used to reading things that i do not know how i can use or that i can maybe think of needing in the distant future. but the tips in this book I can use on wednesday when I go on-air. THAT IS BEYOND COOL!!
it reminds me of a commercial in the subway back home. Its an advertisement of a college and it has a grad student and over his face is his schedule. 8am wake up 9 am work 3pm go to class 6 pm go to night job and use the skills you learned.
This reading has also made me realize how little I know about news broadcast I hope I will have an opportunity to learn more.
Its so weird getting advice in a text book that i can immediately use. Im so used to reading things that i do not know how i can use or that i can maybe think of needing in the distant future. but the tips in this book I can use on wednesday when I go on-air. THAT IS BEYOND COOL!!
it reminds me of a commercial in the subway back home. Its an advertisement of a college and it has a grad student and over his face is his schedule. 8am wake up 9 am work 3pm go to class 6 pm go to night job and use the skills you learned.
This reading has also made me realize how little I know about news broadcast I hope I will have an opportunity to learn more.
Clinton honey
So Clinton was caught cheating then denied it and said it wont happen again. In this NYT article it claims that Clintons aids planted a question in a Q and A session.
Clonton claims to not have known.
The advisors said that this was an unofficial tactic they use. but not it will be officially against the rules.
If this is a common tactic then how does clinton "not know about it" I she is lying she is not fit for president is she is so ignorant she does not know what is going on right under her nose she is not fit for president.
If she really did not know then she would take real action to prevent it from happening again but no one got fired or punished in any way. Instead staff members have been told to avoid doing it again. - they have not been told to stop doing it- no they should avoid doing it but you know if they cant help themselves then thats alright.
Honestly if this is the kind of thing that Clinton means when she says change then her presidency would go unnoticed because nothing would change.
She'll probably tell the US military to " avoid" killing Iraquis and invading countries
Clonton claims to not have known.
The advisors said that this was an unofficial tactic they use. but not it will be officially against the rules.
If this is a common tactic then how does clinton "not know about it" I she is lying she is not fit for president is she is so ignorant she does not know what is going on right under her nose she is not fit for president.
If she really did not know then she would take real action to prevent it from happening again but no one got fired or punished in any way. Instead staff members have been told to avoid doing it again. - they have not been told to stop doing it- no they should avoid doing it but you know if they cant help themselves then thats alright.
Honestly if this is the kind of thing that Clinton means when she says change then her presidency would go unnoticed because nothing would change.
She'll probably tell the US military to " avoid" killing Iraquis and invading countries
Monday, November 5, 2007
Deomocrats full of air?
So according to this NYT article the 2008 elections are too extraordinary for the democrats to be sure of the 2008 win. They base this mostly on clintons bad press week. And how the war (one of the democrats best bets in this election) may be coming off of the front pages.
however i the last two elections (at least this is how back my presidential election memory streches) the people chose the candidate who was less worse not the better candidate- i dont think this election will be much better- we may like neither party but one must run the country so lets choose less evil of the two.
and i think the republicans have more negatives against them thendemocrats do.
so these elections may have very unique dinamics but the rules are the same- get the most votes not the most people- a person without a vote is not important- if of the country does not want you to be president but you got the most votes then thats all that matters
however i the last two elections (at least this is how back my presidential election memory streches) the people chose the candidate who was less worse not the better candidate- i dont think this election will be much better- we may like neither party but one must run the country so lets choose less evil of the two.
and i think the republicans have more negatives against them thendemocrats do.
so these elections may have very unique dinamics but the rules are the same- get the most votes not the most people- a person without a vote is not important- if of the country does not want you to be president but you got the most votes then thats all that matters
Monday, October 29, 2007
the elections once again- less serious this time
Here's a fun little fact according to facebook Stephen Colbert is the most popular candidate for the 2008 US presidential elections. It took merely a week for the Colbert support group to become the biggest face-book group by far and for face-book to take the group offline. Although many of the supporters are underaged the statistics bring up a good question.
Ok so maybe this entry is not a traditional election entry and serves a comical purpose but maybe it reveals something dire about our politics.
why is it that professionals who try so very hard to gain support who spend millions and millions of dollars trying to get support and enhancing their career have problems getting similar support to a celebrity who simply fake announced his candidaciship
this brings up a theme present in previous elections- there was a study done in the last election that Oprah would have had a serous chance of winning the presidency if she won.
why is it seems that people who the public wants to run for president do not run?
Is it a fault in our system? Is it that the best leaders are the ones who found themselves in a position of power not spent their entire lifetime getting to it?
It is like in any other job. the people who perform a job for the mere power of it are horrible at what they do. maybe the problem is that politicians run for power. but is that the way it has to be? are there alternatives? should candidates be given other incentives to run? or maybe we could vote for people without the campaigns. like on american idol- ya politics is confusing and without answers
Ok so maybe this entry is not a traditional election entry and serves a comical purpose but maybe it reveals something dire about our politics.
why is it that professionals who try so very hard to gain support who spend millions and millions of dollars trying to get support and enhancing their career have problems getting similar support to a celebrity who simply fake announced his candidaciship
this brings up a theme present in previous elections- there was a study done in the last election that Oprah would have had a serous chance of winning the presidency if she won.
why is it seems that people who the public wants to run for president do not run?
Is it a fault in our system? Is it that the best leaders are the ones who found themselves in a position of power not spent their entire lifetime getting to it?
It is like in any other job. the people who perform a job for the mere power of it are horrible at what they do. maybe the problem is that politicians run for power. but is that the way it has to be? are there alternatives? should candidates be given other incentives to run? or maybe we could vote for people without the campaigns. like on american idol- ya politics is confusing and without answers
Courts and other stuff
WOW if reading about a job is head splitting and daunting why would anyone would to perform it? Who in the world would voluntarily put themselves through so much suffering? There are s many components to trials so many pesky details through mounds of boredom. It seems a court beat reporter has to sit to through ages of deathly-boring material to get one little interesting story- but they have to pay attention to each detail because there is a chance that at any one point in time during the trial the story of a lifetime may unfold.
not only does court material seem inhumanly boring but ridiculously hard to understand as well. A reporter has to pay attention to every pesky detail. I would not be able to tell the difference between a jail and a prison if I was sent on a court story. The reporter does not have a law degree so she or he must at all times feel two steps behind everyone else in the court. and what is worse he or she can under no circumstances report inaccurate information and report in a way that his or her readers may understand. So a reporter must understand the case in depth and have no question regarding the validity of the facts with which he or she is presenting.
All of this would be hard enough to do if all the information was presented on a silver platter to the journalist. but no! on top of all the troubles mentioned above there is more much more-- in order to even begin doing anything that I mentioned previously a reporter must first search, hunt and attack for information. any details of a case may be hard to get and to prove their validity even harder.
WAY TOO MUCH WORK- I fell bad for these people but perhaps I should hold my tongue for their work may soon seem like child's play to me- the journalism institution is ever evolving and the reporters job is getting harder and harder. I should be prepared for a long haul of work in my career of choice.
not only does court material seem inhumanly boring but ridiculously hard to understand as well. A reporter has to pay attention to every pesky detail. I would not be able to tell the difference between a jail and a prison if I was sent on a court story. The reporter does not have a law degree so she or he must at all times feel two steps behind everyone else in the court. and what is worse he or she can under no circumstances report inaccurate information and report in a way that his or her readers may understand. So a reporter must understand the case in depth and have no question regarding the validity of the facts with which he or she is presenting.
All of this would be hard enough to do if all the information was presented on a silver platter to the journalist. but no! on top of all the troubles mentioned above there is more much more-- in order to even begin doing anything that I mentioned previously a reporter must first search, hunt and attack for information. any details of a case may be hard to get and to prove their validity even harder.
WAY TOO MUCH WORK- I fell bad for these people but perhaps I should hold my tongue for their work may soon seem like child's play to me- the journalism institution is ever evolving and the reporters job is getting harder and harder. I should be prepared for a long haul of work in my career of choice.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
The long long reading
Crime beat-
Well if this is an entry position I would love it- 9 gazilion times better then the writing obituaries.
I understand the reading's show of relation between beat reporting and a good drama- filled with hate violence murder and rape- all things that are interesting to the human pshyche but I just think that makes the beat that much more appealing- I dont understand why this article kept on speaking about how crime reporting is not a respected profession- I mean I assume that they are telling the truth but I dont see why that is- when average joe opens the newspaper he is not going to look at the international section but at the article the guy with the crime beat- because thats what is interesting. The crime beat journalist gets the most reads.
Also crime beat reporters can see the outcome of their hard work quite easily- if there is a rapist on the loose and the police has tips for the community on how to protect themselves that is viable information that will help a lot of people- information that the crime beat person will deliver
I think that police and firefighters are a communities finest and the crime beat reporter is the one that can connect them with the community- a task of honor
Although the journalist has this positive role for the community I do not think she should be obliged to make sure that kids dont follow criminals footsteps because she made criminals infamous. If a guy blows his brains up in a public venue that is news worthy and not what kids will think of it- parents should be in charge of what kids are allowed to read not the journalist.
Covering Crimes and victims
WOW that was creepy- its like the anti-llifeguard training- it felt like the exact opposite chapter of "dealing with the media" in my life guarding manuel. it read like it to- if the victem does this and this then do this and this. do get yourself into more then you can handle ... yada yada yada
It was also the exact opposite
lifeduard- under not circumstance release any information or talk to the media- EVER- the are the evil ones avoid at all costs-
journalist- if you see a body with a human soul that has anything to do with the interview- ATACK!
ok maybe not attack but approach gently and try to interview- but still exact opposite.
i think if I was mourning my mother's death and a journalist approached my during a breather brake outside the hospital i would punch him. literarily not even kidding straight in the nose a swift punch and maybe a round house kick- hey the hospital is right there I would not feel too guilty-
How can i be expected to act that hidiously toward people in mourning. I dont think that hospitals are an
appropriate setting for journalists- no matter how good the story- show some respect
Covering the courts
Oh DAM- this sounds like having to do all the annoying things a lawyer has to do with out the wealth or glory.
I think I rather do obituaries then be on this beat- so much confusing research- all while trying to not fall into a "Chicago motif"(I mean ofcourse the movie where the lawyer was the puppet master of all the reporters)
It sounds like a really hard case- and i do not see the point of them- ok i would be interesting to cover a case that changes the legal system but how often does that happen most of the time it is people alleged of a crime that will get a sentence whats it to my reader? they cant change the verdict and they wont be affected by it - at most they can idly gossip about out- and although that can be interesting and everything it usually has bad consequences where people are judged in the court of the mass media not the trial.
dont get me wrong trials open to the public are important for our democracy I just wish to have my hands clean of them- they seem like the are the child laborers that make my cheap clothes- i benefit from them but not necessarily approve of them- ok grim comparison but still
Well if this is an entry position I would love it- 9 gazilion times better then the writing obituaries.
I understand the reading's show of relation between beat reporting and a good drama- filled with hate violence murder and rape- all things that are interesting to the human pshyche but I just think that makes the beat that much more appealing- I dont understand why this article kept on speaking about how crime reporting is not a respected profession- I mean I assume that they are telling the truth but I dont see why that is- when average joe opens the newspaper he is not going to look at the international section but at the article the guy with the crime beat- because thats what is interesting. The crime beat journalist gets the most reads.
Also crime beat reporters can see the outcome of their hard work quite easily- if there is a rapist on the loose and the police has tips for the community on how to protect themselves that is viable information that will help a lot of people- information that the crime beat person will deliver
I think that police and firefighters are a communities finest and the crime beat reporter is the one that can connect them with the community- a task of honor
Although the journalist has this positive role for the community I do not think she should be obliged to make sure that kids dont follow criminals footsteps because she made criminals infamous. If a guy blows his brains up in a public venue that is news worthy and not what kids will think of it- parents should be in charge of what kids are allowed to read not the journalist.
Covering Crimes and victims
WOW that was creepy- its like the anti-llifeguard training- it felt like the exact opposite chapter of "dealing with the media" in my life guarding manuel. it read like it to- if the victem does this and this then do this and this. do get yourself into more then you can handle ... yada yada yada
It was also the exact opposite
lifeduard- under not circumstance release any information or talk to the media- EVER- the are the evil ones avoid at all costs-
journalist- if you see a body with a human soul that has anything to do with the interview- ATACK!
ok maybe not attack but approach gently and try to interview- but still exact opposite.
i think if I was mourning my mother's death and a journalist approached my during a breather brake outside the hospital i would punch him. literarily not even kidding straight in the nose a swift punch and maybe a round house kick- hey the hospital is right there I would not feel too guilty-
How can i be expected to act that hidiously toward people in mourning. I dont think that hospitals are an
appropriate setting for journalists- no matter how good the story- show some respect
Covering the courts
Oh DAM- this sounds like having to do all the annoying things a lawyer has to do with out the wealth or glory.
I think I rather do obituaries then be on this beat- so much confusing research- all while trying to not fall into a "Chicago motif"(I mean ofcourse the movie where the lawyer was the puppet master of all the reporters)
It sounds like a really hard case- and i do not see the point of them- ok i would be interesting to cover a case that changes the legal system but how often does that happen most of the time it is people alleged of a crime that will get a sentence whats it to my reader? they cant change the verdict and they wont be affected by it - at most they can idly gossip about out- and although that can be interesting and everything it usually has bad consequences where people are judged in the court of the mass media not the trial.
dont get me wrong trials open to the public are important for our democracy I just wish to have my hands clean of them- they seem like the are the child laborers that make my cheap clothes- i benefit from them but not necessarily approve of them- ok grim comparison but still
Monday, October 22, 2007
Monday, October 15, 2007
Illigal immigration and border control
yes ok i am bias on this subject I know plenty of illegal immigrants and personally hate immigration (INS)- or maybe that makes me simply more informed not bias- but anyway- this makes me almost laugh and almost cry at the stance some of the presidential candidates take on this issue.
My favorite is in a new york times "article" http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/immigration/index.html. Mitt Romney has a brilliant idea- lets have all immigrants register to see who should be allowed to get a work permit and who should get deported. yes that a nice idea then we can know who is in the country and eliminate illegal working condition-
WHAT DO YOU THINK IMMIGRATION (INS) HAS BEEN TRYING TO DO FOR THE PAST SEVERA DECADES? invite illegal immigrants for tea?
Illegal immigrants are here because they figured out how to play the system and not get caught- why would they voluntarily come to sign up when there is a possibility of deportation?
Tom Tancredo also has a brilliant idea- lets follow the law- its clear and simple- deport all illegal immigrants and not offer them jobs- your such a visionary tom-
ya thanks for that but see thats the status quo- if an illegal immigrant gets caught they get sent home and its already illegal to hire illegal immigrants
and I am once again disapointed with Giuliani- who wants a fence around our southern border and strict policies on illegal immigration- honestly honey what is the point of your existence? if you are not even closely representing NYC then what are you running on? Its in NYC that children - regardless of legal status get free education and are allowed to go to college- where hospitals must admit everyone if in critical condition and its the city is on economic dependance on illegal emigrant work. i would think he would know that the illegal immigration issue is a bit more complicated.
My favorite is in a new york times "article" http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/immigration/index.html. Mitt Romney has a brilliant idea- lets have all immigrants register to see who should be allowed to get a work permit and who should get deported. yes that a nice idea then we can know who is in the country and eliminate illegal working condition-
WHAT DO YOU THINK IMMIGRATION (INS) HAS BEEN TRYING TO DO FOR THE PAST SEVERA DECADES? invite illegal immigrants for tea?
Illegal immigrants are here because they figured out how to play the system and not get caught- why would they voluntarily come to sign up when there is a possibility of deportation?
Tom Tancredo also has a brilliant idea- lets follow the law- its clear and simple- deport all illegal immigrants and not offer them jobs- your such a visionary tom-
ya thanks for that but see thats the status quo- if an illegal immigrant gets caught they get sent home and its already illegal to hire illegal immigrants
and I am once again disapointed with Giuliani- who wants a fence around our southern border and strict policies on illegal immigration- honestly honey what is the point of your existence? if you are not even closely representing NYC then what are you running on? Its in NYC that children - regardless of legal status get free education and are allowed to go to college- where hospitals must admit everyone if in critical condition and its the city is on economic dependance on illegal emigrant work. i would think he would know that the illegal immigration issue is a bit more complicated.
Monday, October 8, 2007
classroom vs. real world
as I wrote about the nuclear power plant incident in class, I was sure the circumstances were unfair, I knew nothing of the topic, setting, context and am not even a rookie reporter trying to write a story that could be considered major. After reading," ASSESSMENT OF MEDIA PERFORMANCE" I realized that I would be lucky if all these clauses were true in a real situation. If I was a rookie reporter that stumbled on a major story with no experience i could have the brake of my life. I a lot of success in any career is luck. I wish I could be like that guy who was sent to report on the story because he was first back from lunch. So in a way I am now inviting the problems I condemn in class.
Although I would be scared to death of incorrectly/inaccurately reporting on the story, it would be a dream come true. It is just one more paradox in journalism. Just like reporter dont want/but want tragedies, I dont want/but want to expose myself to immeasurable stress and possibility of failure.
I am very interested on the relationship between the reporters that was seen during the coverage period. What was stronger- their competitive side who wanted the best story or the side that wanted to talk about the story to better understand it? Did the amount of reporters allow for more or less information to be released? How intimidated were the reporters without experience when they saw the reporters who have a background in nuclear sciences?
Who were the authorities more willing to talk to? the experts because they better understood or the rookies because they seemed less intimidating and less harmful?
Although I would be scared to death of incorrectly/inaccurately reporting on the story, it would be a dream come true. It is just one more paradox in journalism. Just like reporter dont want/but want tragedies, I dont want/but want to expose myself to immeasurable stress and possibility of failure.
I am very interested on the relationship between the reporters that was seen during the coverage period. What was stronger- their competitive side who wanted the best story or the side that wanted to talk about the story to better understand it? Did the amount of reporters allow for more or less information to be released? How intimidated were the reporters without experience when they saw the reporters who have a background in nuclear sciences?
Who were the authorities more willing to talk to? the experts because they better understood or the rookies because they seemed less intimidating and less harmful?
Clinton v Obama horse race
So let me recap this NYT article for you...
the rookie Obama advances and has a clear lead over Hillary with more money and more supporters
but Clinton takes out her anticipated secret weapon and passes Obama for a marginal lead...
election, race, spectacle... all the same... what's the difference between presidential elections, the olympics and the super-bowl... one appears in the news section, one is international and one appears in the sports section--- and one more minor detail the 1st determines the fate of the planet
I wonder why elecitions are covered in such detail... because they determin our faith as a democratic society or because people want entertainment?
Many poeple speak as passionately about the "American Idol" elections as they do about the presidential elections. I wonder if the only reason the presidential elections stay on people's minds longer is because they require a longer process and there are more juicy details to talk about.
I know I am not making an astonishing claim and this argument is as old as the elections themselves: but let me pose the following question:
Are horse-race style elections not the best answer for a democratic society?
Now dont get me wrong, I have no idea what the answer to that is. I am but a naive college student, but I do have ideas about it.
The pros and cons of a horse race election:
Cons:
the elections may already be decided before election day
the most important issues are not covered in the news media
people focus on sensationalists prospects of the media.
Pros:
People are actually interested in the election- good for democracy
the news media get money
people actually find out about the candidates stances
politicians have to worry more about the consequences of their actions because people may find out.
the rookie Obama advances and has a clear lead over Hillary with more money and more supporters
but Clinton takes out her anticipated secret weapon and passes Obama for a marginal lead...
election, race, spectacle... all the same... what's the difference between presidential elections, the olympics and the super-bowl... one appears in the news section, one is international and one appears in the sports section--- and one more minor detail the 1st determines the fate of the planet
I wonder why elecitions are covered in such detail... because they determin our faith as a democratic society or because people want entertainment?
Many poeple speak as passionately about the "American Idol" elections as they do about the presidential elections. I wonder if the only reason the presidential elections stay on people's minds longer is because they require a longer process and there are more juicy details to talk about.
I know I am not making an astonishing claim and this argument is as old as the elections themselves: but let me pose the following question:
Are horse-race style elections not the best answer for a democratic society?
Now dont get me wrong, I have no idea what the answer to that is. I am but a naive college student, but I do have ideas about it.
The pros and cons of a horse race election:
Cons:
the elections may already be decided before election day
the most important issues are not covered in the news media
people focus on sensationalists prospects of the media.
Pros:
People are actually interested in the election- good for democracy
the news media get money
people actually find out about the candidates stances
politicians have to worry more about the consequences of their actions because people may find out.
Monday, October 1, 2007
WARNING- Dull Content proceed wit caution.
WARNING- Dull content: proceed with caution.
This is what I think should have been written in front of the assigned readings for today. BOOO!!!
Ya ok speeches, meetings, conferences, news-releases= all important contents of reporting.
But they are the dullest part of the job. BORING!!!
Before I become too disrespectful let me say that I have attended news conferences and meetings for almost every story I published and some of them were actually interesting. But I love journalism despite having to attend and read these.
It's like doing school homework. Read the following or listen to the following and give me a 200 word summery. DULL.
I admit they are important to stories. When reporting on an event or group a reporter can better understand the situation if he or she attends a meeting where the issue is discussed and it would be highly inefficient when someone of importance had to give a separate interview to all media answering the same questions. I just wish there was a better solution.
Probably the real reason I am so sour about them is because of the difficulty to get accurate information about them. Unlike in an interview you cannot immediately ask for clarification. The people will continue to talk in their own lingo and by the time you figure out their first point they are on their 5th point. They are also harder to concentrate on then an 8am calculus class. A tired brain can hardly produce accurate information. And what's more scare to a reporter then reporting false information? Its a nightmarish dilemma.
This is what I think should have been written in front of the assigned readings for today. BOOO!!!
Ya ok speeches, meetings, conferences, news-releases= all important contents of reporting.
But they are the dullest part of the job. BORING!!!
Before I become too disrespectful let me say that I have attended news conferences and meetings for almost every story I published and some of them were actually interesting. But I love journalism despite having to attend and read these.
It's like doing school homework. Read the following or listen to the following and give me a 200 word summery. DULL.
I admit they are important to stories. When reporting on an event or group a reporter can better understand the situation if he or she attends a meeting where the issue is discussed and it would be highly inefficient when someone of importance had to give a separate interview to all media answering the same questions. I just wish there was a better solution.
Probably the real reason I am so sour about them is because of the difficulty to get accurate information about them. Unlike in an interview you cannot immediately ask for clarification. The people will continue to talk in their own lingo and by the time you figure out their first point they are on their 5th point. They are also harder to concentrate on then an 8am calculus class. A tired brain can hardly produce accurate information. And what's more scare to a reporter then reporting false information? Its a nightmarish dilemma.
Thats it im turning Democrat
It has finally happened I have decided on a political party- all because of a homework assignment- oh the irony.
I will register a Democrat first chance I get. I was going to follow my mothers footsteps and stay independent but in the past year I have been leaning more Republican. Now the final straw has come. I have come to this revelation thanks to this NYT article. I truly say it is engines. It brings all the republican and democratic candidates together and shows a brief summery on their stance on global warming. It is so easy to understand: they give you a quote, what the candidate says he would do were he elected into office and actions he has taken in the past.
The last straw of my loyalty for my beloved Giuliani who has turned my city into the one I know now, is broken. HE SUPPORTS NUCLEAR POWER-booooo!!!! and he didnt do anything against global warming. and hes affiliated with a company that contributes to global warming- WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO MY HERO? and since when has he started calling the middle east "our enemies". Why are they our enemies? And since when does he take a stand that one cannot make a difference without a collaborative effort- he from the city for pete's sake. WE KNOW WE BETTER THEN EVERYONE ELSE-WE ACT LIKE IT TOO!!! so whats the problem. he has done marvelous things in new york without worying about what other are doing too much... since when has he enetered the finger pointing game and left the take responsibility for you own actions gamer- come on what wrong with you man?!
and oh yea-- republicans wake up!!! Are you serioius you are not sure weather global warming is man caused? experts disagree- numnutss- if you count your fortune tellers as experts then maybe- but experts have been agreeing that we are the cause of global wariming for years- stop putting fire under your bathtub- YOU WILL BOIL- no matter how much you deny it!!!!! And first worry about what you do then worry about what everyone else is doing- DID YOU PEOPLE NEVER GO TO KINDERGARDEN WHERE THEY TEACH YOU THESE BASIC RULES ABOUT LIFE?! GROW UP- just because everyone else is littering the cafeteria does not make it ok for you to do it!!!
All other debates will become null if we are frying to death!!!!
ok now back to my cool headed reporter side- republican and democrats disagree on the cause of global warming dispite popular beliefe in human's causing global warming. Most democrats argue that immidiate action is needed to save the planet and Republican argue that drastic measures are not needed because we do not know the true reason behind global warming--
YA OK ILL never be able to write a story about this- because I would just have ti finish that sentence with a descriptive word such as : EVIL IDIOTS...
I will register a Democrat first chance I get. I was going to follow my mothers footsteps and stay independent but in the past year I have been leaning more Republican. Now the final straw has come. I have come to this revelation thanks to this NYT article. I truly say it is engines. It brings all the republican and democratic candidates together and shows a brief summery on their stance on global warming. It is so easy to understand: they give you a quote, what the candidate says he would do were he elected into office and actions he has taken in the past.
The last straw of my loyalty for my beloved Giuliani who has turned my city into the one I know now, is broken. HE SUPPORTS NUCLEAR POWER-booooo!!!! and he didnt do anything against global warming. and hes affiliated with a company that contributes to global warming- WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO MY HERO? and since when has he started calling the middle east "our enemies". Why are they our enemies? And since when does he take a stand that one cannot make a difference without a collaborative effort- he from the city for pete's sake. WE KNOW WE BETTER THEN EVERYONE ELSE-WE ACT LIKE IT TOO!!! so whats the problem. he has done marvelous things in new york without worying about what other are doing too much... since when has he enetered the finger pointing game and left the take responsibility for you own actions gamer- come on what wrong with you man?!
and oh yea-- republicans wake up!!! Are you serioius you are not sure weather global warming is man caused? experts disagree- numnutss- if you count your fortune tellers as experts then maybe- but experts have been agreeing that we are the cause of global wariming for years- stop putting fire under your bathtub- YOU WILL BOIL- no matter how much you deny it!!!!! And first worry about what you do then worry about what everyone else is doing- DID YOU PEOPLE NEVER GO TO KINDERGARDEN WHERE THEY TEACH YOU THESE BASIC RULES ABOUT LIFE?! GROW UP- just because everyone else is littering the cafeteria does not make it ok for you to do it!!!
All other debates will become null if we are frying to death!!!!
ok now back to my cool headed reporter side- republican and democrats disagree on the cause of global warming dispite popular beliefe in human's causing global warming. Most democrats argue that immidiate action is needed to save the planet and Republican argue that drastic measures are not needed because we do not know the true reason behind global warming--
YA OK ILL never be able to write a story about this- because I would just have ti finish that sentence with a descriptive word such as : EVIL IDIOTS...
Monday, September 24, 2007
Obituaries?
Are you serious? Ok maybe I am a negative skeptic today but getting life's pleasure and adventure from obituaries just seems weird. Ok so I will probably write them because I will take any job I can take. but thinking of them as an art form just seems odd. Then again thats what my friends say of journalism in general and when I talk about politics they snooze... but obituaries are a stretch even for me.
and if your write obituaries for a living you depend on people dying... yes ok journalist almost want bad things for a good story... but sometimes a good story comes out of positive things... and the negative w are reporting on does not have to be as permanent as death....
and that just seems like a lot of responsibility... i would not want somebody's life's memories to be put in my hands... how do I know what they were really like? what if he or she was some amazing person but simply did not do extraordinary things why should my hand deprive their greatness because I cant write a sensual obituary on them? Or how do I know they were not really bad/evil and I just made all the people who suffered by their had hurt and feel guilty...
plus i like journalism because its supposed to be objective and there is nothing objective in obituaries... it takes a sensitive hand to write them a hand that beautify words and seem just all the things they beat out of us in journalism classes
I dont think that journalist should write obituaries... would writers and authors not do a better job and romanticizing a beloved dead one? Could not writers better help those who were close to the dearly departed... obituaries dont need to be cold hard fact they serve more for closure then for information
There are people who read obituaries like novels for pete's sake....
So in conclusion I would like to show appreciation for all those people writing obituaries.. you fill an important and delicat role in society one in which there are no clear wrongs and writes... you are brave and you are kind... and I sure hope I wont have to join you for long...
and if your write obituaries for a living you depend on people dying... yes ok journalist almost want bad things for a good story... but sometimes a good story comes out of positive things... and the negative w are reporting on does not have to be as permanent as death....
and that just seems like a lot of responsibility... i would not want somebody's life's memories to be put in my hands... how do I know what they were really like? what if he or she was some amazing person but simply did not do extraordinary things why should my hand deprive their greatness because I cant write a sensual obituary on them? Or how do I know they were not really bad/evil and I just made all the people who suffered by their had hurt and feel guilty...
plus i like journalism because its supposed to be objective and there is nothing objective in obituaries... it takes a sensitive hand to write them a hand that beautify words and seem just all the things they beat out of us in journalism classes
I dont think that journalist should write obituaries... would writers and authors not do a better job and romanticizing a beloved dead one? Could not writers better help those who were close to the dearly departed... obituaries dont need to be cold hard fact they serve more for closure then for information
There are people who read obituaries like novels for pete's sake....
So in conclusion I would like to show appreciation for all those people writing obituaries.. you fill an important and delicat role in society one in which there are no clear wrongs and writes... you are brave and you are kind... and I sure hope I wont have to join you for long...
Bush in the Democrat Republican Showdown
So new polls start the horse race with democrats leading...
No one in the bush administration is running for the presidency...
Republlicans avoid the subject of Bush and his administration...
Republicans are using Bush to show how Reppublicans can screw up the country...
and Bush aproval ratings are reducolously low..I mean really low like 20% approval...I think French Queen Maria Antuanet had a better apruval rating when she was beheded
and Bush thinks he can help republicans win office in the upcoming elections..He said he can be a "strong asset" to0 republican canditates.
Ok I know that our president is not known for his great logical reasoning...
but seriously?
Is he in such denial? The president who went from an 80%approval rating to a 20% approval rating thinks he can help his party?
Really there is not much you need to know... his own dam party is ashamed of him. Most people said that they would rather have a democratic president.
Why? Ok I know we like to make jokes and say that he is stupid... but our president is the single most influential man on earth... and has a lot of vacation days... in my book he is a genius... I wish I could have all that... Even if he did listen to others advise, he knew who to listen cuz even his daddy could not stay in office for two cycles. So what are his motives? Is he in denial? or does he have a trick up his sleve? either way his words frighten me
No one in the bush administration is running for the presidency...
Republlicans avoid the subject of Bush and his administration...
Republicans are using Bush to show how Reppublicans can screw up the country...
and Bush aproval ratings are reducolously low..I mean really low like 20% approval...I think French Queen Maria Antuanet had a better apruval rating when she was beheded
and Bush thinks he can help republicans win office in the upcoming elections..He said he can be a "strong asset" to0 republican canditates.
Ok I know that our president is not known for his great logical reasoning...
but seriously?
Is he in such denial? The president who went from an 80%approval rating to a 20% approval rating thinks he can help his party?
Really there is not much you need to know... his own dam party is ashamed of him. Most people said that they would rather have a democratic president.
Why? Ok I know we like to make jokes and say that he is stupid... but our president is the single most influential man on earth... and has a lot of vacation days... in my book he is a genius... I wish I could have all that... Even if he did listen to others advise, he knew who to listen cuz even his daddy could not stay in office for two cycles. So what are his motives? Is he in denial? or does he have a trick up his sleve? either way his words frighten me
Monday, September 17, 2007
New media vs old values- let the healing begin
The RSS feed and online interactive time-lines and maps makes the internet even more user friendly. Through tools like these finding and using information becomes much easier. It is the new generation. people will read what they are interested in and they will find the information that is relevant to that despite what the headline of the New York Times is. This must change the role of the journalist in this new era... right?
In a 2007 modern journalism classroom in a a high tech building where classrooms are equipped with mutli-media and computers and where there are labs that allow students to broadcast themselves through radio, television and internet, students are still expected to read about journalistic ethics, tools and skills that were used 40 years ago when a pc were simply 2 insignificant words and the world was connected through telephone and telegram wires.
Why are we learning the same techniques of quoting that were used in this pre-historic era with computer dinosaurs? Is there something we can learn from the cavemen journalist?
Of-course!!!- one may argue- a good quote is as important now as it was then and truth was as important is as important now as it was then.
So maybe instead of discarding our predecessors good values we can build on them.
We now have top quality recorders that most journalists use in any interview good note taking skills may seem obsolete. but what's a recorder without the brain. a hand without the brain to tell it to write? or a story without good old fashioned sense.
So yes maybe the industry is changing and morphing into ways that will be unequivocal to old style journalism, but we still need to learn. because you cant learn calculous without first learning to multiply, even if you have a calculator to do it for you.
In a 2007 modern journalism classroom in a a high tech building where classrooms are equipped with mutli-media and computers and where there are labs that allow students to broadcast themselves through radio, television and internet, students are still expected to read about journalistic ethics, tools and skills that were used 40 years ago when a pc were simply 2 insignificant words and the world was connected through telephone and telegram wires.
Why are we learning the same techniques of quoting that were used in this pre-historic era with computer dinosaurs? Is there something we can learn from the cavemen journalist?
Of-course!!!- one may argue- a good quote is as important now as it was then and truth was as important is as important now as it was then.
So maybe instead of discarding our predecessors good values we can build on them.
We now have top quality recorders that most journalists use in any interview good note taking skills may seem obsolete. but what's a recorder without the brain. a hand without the brain to tell it to write? or a story without good old fashioned sense.
So yes maybe the industry is changing and morphing into ways that will be unequivocal to old style journalism, but we still need to learn. because you cant learn calculous without first learning to multiply, even if you have a calculator to do it for you.
Youth in the 2008 Elections
"Fish and children dont have voices." The saying now is not only old but inaccurate. Youth in the US is taking more and more interest in politics. This means that people our age are no longer the future of the nation we are affecting our nation NOW. According to the Targeted News Service youth ages 17-29 will make up 17% of the nations voting population.
To me this shows the great power of the media. Although we are of course different then our parents generation or even generation X, the main difference is not us but our enviorment. We can now access more information then any other generation could think of. The US federal news tells us that experts think that the reason why our generation is so interested in voting is because we can easily get the information we need to be interested. Even if one does not have a specific interest in politics an interesting link or post on-line can lead a web surfer to research candidates. This non-aggressive and impersonal method makes the surfer not feel pressured.
We spend a large percentage of our lives on-line and are guided by its endless paths. But these paths impact our decisions and our political views.
Youth is not only more interested in politics then our predecessors, we also seem to lean more to the left with our political stances and not adhere to party lines. Does this mean that the internet is in some way socializing our though process and decision making. Is the new-media, the internet, invoking liberal views or are we already liberal and the internet may seem liberal because of the links we choose to follow. Does the internet have power over us or do we we have power over the internet? Does youth have more of a say in politics or is it the people who are more tech savy then others that have more influence over the elections?
To me this shows the great power of the media. Although we are of course different then our parents generation or even generation X, the main difference is not us but our enviorment. We can now access more information then any other generation could think of. The US federal news tells us that experts think that the reason why our generation is so interested in voting is because we can easily get the information we need to be interested. Even if one does not have a specific interest in politics an interesting link or post on-line can lead a web surfer to research candidates. This non-aggressive and impersonal method makes the surfer not feel pressured.
We spend a large percentage of our lives on-line and are guided by its endless paths. But these paths impact our decisions and our political views.
Youth is not only more interested in politics then our predecessors, we also seem to lean more to the left with our political stances and not adhere to party lines. Does this mean that the internet is in some way socializing our though process and decision making. Is the new-media, the internet, invoking liberal views or are we already liberal and the internet may seem liberal because of the links we choose to follow. Does the internet have power over us or do we we have power over the internet? Does youth have more of a say in politics or is it the people who are more tech savy then others that have more influence over the elections?
Monday, September 10, 2007
Thompson
Thompson finally declared his candidacy. After much talk he finally has declared it officially. NPR and the LA times seem to make him out as the hero of the rightist movement. He is just to the conservative americans. The NYT wont even give him that.[http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/08/2008-thompson-dives-in-hagel-may-step-out/ ]
They show how he skirts around homosexuality and other important conservative topics.
From what I have read no one really takes him seriously. He came in late to the elections. missed many of the debates and is currently justifying his actions. The newspaper seem to all concede that he is over-the-hill. His election being a feeble attempt at his once existing political career. Even the pictures make him seem very old.
Ofcourse none of the articles said that. They all were fair on the surface. Quoting different people. THey quoted Thompson himself and when he defended himself. The pictures were not that obviously biast. but is that not worse then if the newspapers simply came out and be clear about their point of views. because if people believe that these sources are unbiased and fair then they will forget to look at other sides of the story. It seems that Thompson's fate has already been sealed by the somewhat liberal media.
They show how he skirts around homosexuality and other important conservative topics.
From what I have read no one really takes him seriously. He came in late to the elections. missed many of the debates and is currently justifying his actions. The newspaper seem to all concede that he is over-the-hill. His election being a feeble attempt at his once existing political career. Even the pictures make him seem very old.
Ofcourse none of the articles said that. They all were fair on the surface. Quoting different people. THey quoted Thompson himself and when he defended himself. The pictures were not that obviously biast. but is that not worse then if the newspapers simply came out and be clear about their point of views. because if people believe that these sources are unbiased and fair then they will forget to look at other sides of the story. It seems that Thompson's fate has already been sealed by the somewhat liberal media.
The noblility of reporting
It is indeed interesting how "news reporting and writing" starts off its book with declaring the nobel nature of journalists. The portray journalists as the informers of the people. Protectors- not ones who physically stop damage- that would be bad journalism- but one who give power to the people- the power of knowledge. This position is so sacred and necessary that it must not be tainted with bad journalism. A journalist must have honor, integrity. be fair to all and never sell out. It is with this mind that this book chooses to start off aspiring journalists. The idea is nobel. Was it not one of our own founding fathers that said a democratic and free government is necessary. A free press is necessary, but if need to be chosen he would chose a free press over a free government.
The idea of truth and justice appears in many classes and many books. The real reason I chose this profession comes in the following two chapters of the book. Journalistic integrity is not only talk. It is real. This book spells out for you how you can be nobel and change the world. Not in abstract and indecipherable ways, but in clearly and concisely. Everything about the journalistic education says that you must be fair and honest. The guidelines are strict. A journalist must hold high standards in every aspect of her job. Even in miniscule things such as grammar. A journalist must not publish something with inappropriate grammar even on tight deadline. It is unprofessional can destroy a reputation. The rules are so clear and firm and evolving that a new grammar guide comes out every year in the AP style book.
Of-course, if one regards journalists so highly one can be quite disappointed. This could be a turn off: Its so corrupt I cant do anything about it. Or it can be engaging- these principles can be put into practice- the media is getting there it just needs more people who believe in the principles. Depends on the way you look at it.
The idea of truth and justice appears in many classes and many books. The real reason I chose this profession comes in the following two chapters of the book. Journalistic integrity is not only talk. It is real. This book spells out for you how you can be nobel and change the world. Not in abstract and indecipherable ways, but in clearly and concisely. Everything about the journalistic education says that you must be fair and honest. The guidelines are strict. A journalist must hold high standards in every aspect of her job. Even in miniscule things such as grammar. A journalist must not publish something with inappropriate grammar even on tight deadline. It is unprofessional can destroy a reputation. The rules are so clear and firm and evolving that a new grammar guide comes out every year in the AP style book.
Of-course, if one regards journalists so highly one can be quite disappointed. This could be a turn off: Its so corrupt I cant do anything about it. Or it can be engaging- these principles can be put into practice- the media is getting there it just needs more people who believe in the principles. Depends on the way you look at it.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Change the way we vote.
After more then 200 years of electing our president through the electrol college officials are now reconsidering the practice. With small states who have originally best benefitted from the system reconsidering. Maryland abolished the electrol college with in its state said the nyt- although im not entirly sure what that means. The electoral collage is a national issue more then a state issue. The electrol college makes the election foucus on about a quater of the nations states said George C. Edwards III, a professor of political science at Texas A&M University. In the Editorial section of the LA times Dan Wentzel gives his rather crude opinion of the electoral college as something to be rid off to put nicely as something unfair and undemocratic. In the Editorial pages of The International Herald Tribune, Charles Frederickson, cried that in order for the US to once again represent "freedom, liberty and justice for one and all" the electoral college must be done away with. This man wrote this from Bangkok. Appareantly theUS is not the only one thinking of this issue. The consenses, in the print media at least is that the electoral cocllege should be changed. When I typed in the phrase "electoral college inro LexisNexis the articles seemed to mostlt say the same thing. Although I do see the challenge do democracy in an elloctral college system- I feel the system should not be dissmissed so easily. The system afterall is in our constitution and has been in place from the begining of US history. Is there a reson why it worked so long? Or is it only becauseit was in the constituion that we followed it so long? The main reason it was in the constitution is so that the small states would agree to form one nation (the US). At the time state loyalties were much stronger then country loyalties hardly anyone identified with the country. All the states wanted equal representation. Has the political climate sufficiantly changed that now individual people want equal representation. Is thre other reason why this system worked so long? Have we not had national pride for quite some time? What is with all the murmur now? Wouldn't it be stupid to abruptly change our political system ina political time as delicate as it currently is?
The Evolution of the On-line News
Last year I read The Search: How Google and Its Rivals Rewrote the Rules of Business and Transformed Our Culture ( for more info and reviews go to http://www.amazon.com/Search-Rewrote-Business-Transformed-Culture/dp/1591840880). This book credited Google for inovating the internet. It had a section on online-news. It applouded the expanding internet for making information easier to access as well as more user friendly. But 4 years later The State of the News Media 2007 the judgment on the the online news is not so opptomistic. Although, it applauds the online enviorment for rapidly advancing it does not give it great marks. It speaks about how different news media have different strenghts online and how none have all strenghts or all weaknesses across all categories. This helped me look from a greater distance at something that has become very much part of my normal part: nyt.com. Although the analysis gave good regard to the NYT I could not help but feel defensive. The website, which I love enven more then the paper- has no faults in my books. but the analysis made me realize- that yes- even the nyt has certain problems. Although i like watching the multi-media on the nyt- it is true it is lacking- the video clips are not very common- but its a paper for petes sake. I personally like the news look of the website- it makes the reading feel more legitamete not like reading a fancy my-space page. The high marks of npr- made me want to visit that site more often.
I feel like this analysis is made more for historical references than modern critique. The authors have aknowledged that even through a couple months time the internet has vidly chaged- I hopw that in a couple of years I will be able to look back at this analysis and laugh. Its good to have these kinds of analysis becasue it can better help us appreciate the spped of the evolution of technology. This makes me want to read a report on the state of the interview when NYT and such sites just started. This was like 200 years ago cuz it sure dont feel like 5.
I feel like this analysis is made more for historical references than modern critique. The authors have aknowledged that even through a couple months time the internet has vidly chaged- I hopw that in a couple of years I will be able to look back at this analysis and laugh. Its good to have these kinds of analysis becasue it can better help us appreciate the spped of the evolution of technology. This makes me want to read a report on the state of the interview when NYT and such sites just started. This was like 200 years ago cuz it sure dont feel like 5.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)