Refreshing my memory in the land of Chapter eight led to pretty much the same findings I found the first time around...but a few new things jumped out at me also.
I am still confused as to how one finds clarity and creativity in writing straight news ledes. But after my last story in class about the town meeting Lisa explained to me how you didn't want to start a story. My story's lede had all the right information but was sooo borning even in that first sentence. I had bogged down the reader with too many big boring words right off the bat. After a little editing I found that words like "emergency funds" was much more exciting than the name of some drawn out committee. So I didn't make the same mistake the next committee story I wrote...maybe I learned something...hmmm.
Chapter eight also talks about the importance of details in a story which I completely agree with. If a reporter can put the reader in an accurate setting while reading something of significant importance, I say job well done. I didn't understand that this was a possibility in writing until I read a book by Joan Didion, very cool stuff. If you're a jounalist frustrated with finding creativity in writing like me -- read some of her work and thank me later.
OH I know what was new that I wanted to mention. Using concrete examples. I read a few passages they had as examples of this and I have to say that some of these "concrete examples" were straingly reminiscent of cough...cliches....cough. Interesting...even after we just had that talk in class. This is a big topic for me because yes kids...I once was a cliche addict...I know don't judge me. But they just flowed like smooth BS for me if ya know what I mean. But I'm happy to say that I'm overcoming my addicition with the help of support groups like News I.
Ok -- onto the Media Law chapter. What a dozy, and to think -- I was almost a lawyer...yikes!
I have to say that having studied some of these cases in past legal studies classes I kind of scratched my head at some of the examples given in the book as cases to know. Most of which were so unimportant that I can't remember their names right now -- plus the fact that a vast majority of them settled out of court without really leaving a mark.
But I do smile when I read the popular, "no other business enjoys specific constitutional protection yada yada..."
One thing that I didn't really know alot about before reading this chapter was the idea of privelege. That we as reporters are safe if we are covering any of the three branches of government and quoting what is said from them. If I understand this correctly governmental officials actually have the "privelege" title and we as reporters get to print that even if what they are saying is false information. I thought that was kind of cool and complicated, perhaps we could discuss further in class?
Ah -- and then the actual malice test from good ole' New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) LOVE IT! I had to do a big project on this case and just loved all the details and loops that came out of this decision. I felt the chapter didn't focus enough on the idea of covering a public figure as opposed to a private individual. It's a big line to cross and if one is not familar with that case it could be really confusing.
And finally the whole expectation of privacy. It seems like it would be crystal clear but -- don't go into people's bedrooms -- but actually some of the examples had really random outcomes from the rulings. Sense when does one not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a doctor's office? Maybe I'm just weird but I do! All things we should discuss in class.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0376_0254_ZS.html
Friday, September 28, 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Debating Over Nothing
Wednesday evening the Democratic Presidential hopefuls took to the brightly lit stage again to debate over really nothing. Held at Dartmouth College in Hanover N.H., little attacking was done except for the occasional proding of host Tim Russert. Which most of the serious questions seemed to be specific and directed primarily at the woman of the hour herself -- Hillary Rodham Clinton.
I know....I know....you're thinking "oh here we go again, more Clinton crap."
But let's be honest folks I watched MSNBC's day-long coverage leading up to the event on Wednesday in between classes and after two straight hours of the channel's "why Hillary" focus I threw my remote across the room after putting on an old rerun of "Golden Girls." At least these old ladies know feminism if it bit them in the a....sorry.
Anyways, today coverage of the event has been bleak. I had to skillfully comb the New York Times for an article about the debate. Of course, news of Burma is more important -- I'm not disaggreeing with that. But perhaps they could have done without Sean Penn on the front for some movie he's producing? Finally I found ONE article which referred to the candidates having to answer which bible verse was their favorite....what?!!? Ah...creepy. I wish I could have seen Russert throw that one on em'. If you ask me -- those answers are probably the key to world peace...right.
Of course Dan Balz didn't let me down by both writing an excellent article pointing out Hillary's weaknesses during the evening but also how she seemed to be the center of attention as far as criticism. He also appeared on the pregame show. To me, the man's a rock star. I had the privlege of sitting next to him once when I was lucky enough to get a press pass to an event that Hilary was speaking at. Very cool.
The moral of the story is that this country has seen too many debates with too many candidates only getting mere seconds to answer questions crucial to the country's future. I say thank God the primaries are quickly approaching. Let's get this over with so Democrats can stop playing nicey nice and get down to business.
www.msnbc.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/26/AR2007092601339.html?hpid=topnews
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/the-democrats-quote-scripture/
I know....I know....you're thinking "oh here we go again, more Clinton crap."
But let's be honest folks I watched MSNBC's day-long coverage leading up to the event on Wednesday in between classes and after two straight hours of the channel's "why Hillary" focus I threw my remote across the room after putting on an old rerun of "Golden Girls." At least these old ladies know feminism if it bit them in the a....sorry.
Anyways, today coverage of the event has been bleak. I had to skillfully comb the New York Times for an article about the debate. Of course, news of Burma is more important -- I'm not disaggreeing with that. But perhaps they could have done without Sean Penn on the front for some movie he's producing? Finally I found ONE article which referred to the candidates having to answer which bible verse was their favorite....what?!!? Ah...creepy. I wish I could have seen Russert throw that one on em'. If you ask me -- those answers are probably the key to world peace...right.
Of course Dan Balz didn't let me down by both writing an excellent article pointing out Hillary's weaknesses during the evening but also how she seemed to be the center of attention as far as criticism. He also appeared on the pregame show. To me, the man's a rock star. I had the privlege of sitting next to him once when I was lucky enough to get a press pass to an event that Hilary was speaking at. Very cool.
The moral of the story is that this country has seen too many debates with too many candidates only getting mere seconds to answer questions crucial to the country's future. I say thank God the primaries are quickly approaching. Let's get this over with so Democrats can stop playing nicey nice and get down to business.
www.msnbc.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/26/AR2007092601339.html?hpid=topnews
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/the-democrats-quote-scripture/
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
The Exciting World of Press Releases and News Conferences
This week Chapter 11 focuses primarily on the use of press releases in newsrooms. Personally I understand their importance, how they help newsrooms stay on top of what is going on in the community. But the idea of some lazy journalists just reprinting the pieces of propoganda is gross to me.
This past summer I worked for a major union in New York State. I was an intern in their communications department which meant that mostly I put stickers on ancient folders and found numerous new applications to add to my facebook page. I also was given the chance to write three different articles for their monthly magazine, which was cool to get published. My boss told me that this practice of writing for the Union's publication was similar to how press releases are written...yuck.
When writing my articles I was told by many of my bosses to just "make up" quotes from the Union's president. Feeling very uncomfortable with that the President's secretary then made up a paragraph in front of my eyes and told me to write that he said it. In the chapter it discusses the importance of double checking facts. After my experience last summer I can't stress that enough to my fellow peers.
I thought chapter 12 was much more relevant to what we are currently doing in the classroom. After having covered two different town council meetings in the past month I appreciated the advice given. For instance, the importance of preparation for this events is so crucial to writing a good story. In the last meeting I attended I didn't have time to fully research before going and spent most of my time trying to figure out what a moratorium is and how to spell it. I missed a few quotes because I was too busy scratching me head.
After two stories I feel like I'm beginning to develop a style for covering these events. What also helps me is watching the beat reporter for the Ithaca Journal at these events. It's clear that she covers these quite a bit and when I read her articles she does a decent job summing up the most newsworthy topics out of a meeting that seemed overall dull to someone like me. But she manages to weed through all the technicalities and come up with a comprehensive overview of what is most important to her readers. I've gotta give her credit...going to all those meetings and never falling asleep.
I also agreed with the chapter's point on also covering not only what is being said but the reactions of the auidence members. I suppose of journalism students we should consider ourselves very lucky to be studying in a city like Ithaca. It's citizens a full of life and love of democracy. At the meetings I attended there was numerous citizens who came to speak that I found quite colorful and interesting. Some of them actually knew what they were talking about...go figure! I've let a few quotes from these people slip into my stories just to add some life.
The other point that was made that I pondered over was when at a news conference how important it is to listen to other reporters' questions. I was born with my right ear almost being deaf. I live without a hearing aide and have contemplated getting one but my doctors seem to think the cost would be to great. The problem is that I'm on the verge of having good hearing but sometimes not hearing anything. In class when we have mock press conferences I find is difficult to hear what my fellow peers are asking and therefore have to constantly ask them to repeat themselves. I sit in the back of the room because I can the teacher better without sound reverbing behind me. So I worry that press conferences will be difficult for me, unless perhaps my fellow reporters will be louder than my classmates -- which I hope!
www.theithacajournal.com
This past summer I worked for a major union in New York State. I was an intern in their communications department which meant that mostly I put stickers on ancient folders and found numerous new applications to add to my facebook page. I also was given the chance to write three different articles for their monthly magazine, which was cool to get published. My boss told me that this practice of writing for the Union's publication was similar to how press releases are written...yuck.
When writing my articles I was told by many of my bosses to just "make up" quotes from the Union's president. Feeling very uncomfortable with that the President's secretary then made up a paragraph in front of my eyes and told me to write that he said it. In the chapter it discusses the importance of double checking facts. After my experience last summer I can't stress that enough to my fellow peers.
I thought chapter 12 was much more relevant to what we are currently doing in the classroom. After having covered two different town council meetings in the past month I appreciated the advice given. For instance, the importance of preparation for this events is so crucial to writing a good story. In the last meeting I attended I didn't have time to fully research before going and spent most of my time trying to figure out what a moratorium is and how to spell it. I missed a few quotes because I was too busy scratching me head.
After two stories I feel like I'm beginning to develop a style for covering these events. What also helps me is watching the beat reporter for the Ithaca Journal at these events. It's clear that she covers these quite a bit and when I read her articles she does a decent job summing up the most newsworthy topics out of a meeting that seemed overall dull to someone like me. But she manages to weed through all the technicalities and come up with a comprehensive overview of what is most important to her readers. I've gotta give her credit...going to all those meetings and never falling asleep.
I also agreed with the chapter's point on also covering not only what is being said but the reactions of the auidence members. I suppose of journalism students we should consider ourselves very lucky to be studying in a city like Ithaca. It's citizens a full of life and love of democracy. At the meetings I attended there was numerous citizens who came to speak that I found quite colorful and interesting. Some of them actually knew what they were talking about...go figure! I've let a few quotes from these people slip into my stories just to add some life.
The other point that was made that I pondered over was when at a news conference how important it is to listen to other reporters' questions. I was born with my right ear almost being deaf. I live without a hearing aide and have contemplated getting one but my doctors seem to think the cost would be to great. The problem is that I'm on the verge of having good hearing but sometimes not hearing anything. In class when we have mock press conferences I find is difficult to hear what my fellow peers are asking and therefore have to constantly ask them to repeat themselves. I sit in the back of the room because I can the teacher better without sound reverbing behind me. So I worry that press conferences will be difficult for me, unless perhaps my fellow reporters will be louder than my classmates -- which I hope!
www.theithacajournal.com
Thursday, September 20, 2007
"HillaryCare"
Ok...so it probably comes as no surprise to those of you who read this (thanks mom!) that I'm a Hillary fan. Call me a hopeful socialist commi who is suddenly leaning center for votes, but there's just something about that previous head-banded woman turned presidential hopeful that I just can't get enough of.
It's finally happened -- the apoloclipse is here -- Hillary Clinton has unvieled her new health care plan. And already Republicans, and Democrats alike, are jumping to the be first to remind middle class Americans about her previous "commi" years as First Lady.
It makes me angry. I'll admit, yes she did crash and burn at her first attempt -- but who the hell wouldn't with a Republican Congress and Newt Gingrich at the helm of it all! And the ad campaign created by the health insurance industry and republican leaders lampooned the poor pink suited First Lady before she ever stepped onto the floor of Congress to propose such forward thinking as...gasp...universal health care.
Clearly I've read a thing or two about Ms. Clinton's days battling for healthcare and I think there is so much that voters don't understand. Yes, the plan was way too lofty. But average voters were scared to death of this thing because Newt told them to be. Mom and Pop watching Matlock at home were bombarded with ads telling them the evils of Hillary Clinton. And the problem is that we've all been fed it, digested it and it is now part of our internal makeup as Americans.
I'm getting off track here -- sorry I just get so steamed up! Anyways I appreciated the article by the New York Times on the subject. They of course pointed out Clinton's past fallures in the healthcare ring, but also compared the two plans and noted how different the new one is. Clinton figured it out -- she took her punches and got back into the ring with a new a better idea that will be more digestable to Americans who already like their healthcare coverage but will help those without.
The Washington Post also discussed her new fleet of ads that have been hitting the airwaves recently, also a smart change from the past. Clinton has learned her lesson and is fighting fire with fire. She's educating voters the same way Republicans turned them against her in the 90s.
She also reached out by appearing on the Today Show the morning after her announcement. I thought she did well and handled some tough questions like a pro. She even once laughed at Matt Lauer, it seemed she was saying in her head, "please, don't toy with me... I'm Hillay F-ing Clinton," or ya know...something like that.
The moral of the story is I love her...and there's nothing you Obama people can do about it.
It's finally happened -- the apoloclipse is here -- Hillary Clinton has unvieled her new health care plan. And already Republicans, and Democrats alike, are jumping to the be first to remind middle class Americans about her previous "commi" years as First Lady.
It makes me angry. I'll admit, yes she did crash and burn at her first attempt -- but who the hell wouldn't with a Republican Congress and Newt Gingrich at the helm of it all! And the ad campaign created by the health insurance industry and republican leaders lampooned the poor pink suited First Lady before she ever stepped onto the floor of Congress to propose such forward thinking as...gasp...universal health care.
Clearly I've read a thing or two about Ms. Clinton's days battling for healthcare and I think there is so much that voters don't understand. Yes, the plan was way too lofty. But average voters were scared to death of this thing because Newt told them to be. Mom and Pop watching Matlock at home were bombarded with ads telling them the evils of Hillary Clinton. And the problem is that we've all been fed it, digested it and it is now part of our internal makeup as Americans.
I'm getting off track here -- sorry I just get so steamed up! Anyways I appreciated the article by the New York Times on the subject. They of course pointed out Clinton's past fallures in the healthcare ring, but also compared the two plans and noted how different the new one is. Clinton figured it out -- she took her punches and got back into the ring with a new a better idea that will be more digestable to Americans who already like their healthcare coverage but will help those without.
The Washington Post also discussed her new fleet of ads that have been hitting the airwaves recently, also a smart change from the past. Clinton has learned her lesson and is fighting fire with fire. She's educating voters the same way Republicans turned them against her in the 90s.
She also reached out by appearing on the Today Show the morning after her announcement. I thought she did well and handled some tough questions like a pro. She even once laughed at Matt Lauer, it seemed she was saying in her head, "please, don't toy with me... I'm Hillay F-ing Clinton," or ya know...something like that.
The moral of the story is I love her...and there's nothing you Obama people can do about it.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Last Words
Whenever I tell people I am a journalism student someone always brings up the fact that I'll be writing obituaries someday as a young reporter...it's a reality that I have come to accept lately in the competitive world of print.
But I never imagined the first obituary I would write would be my beloved Grandfather's a little over a year ago. My obituary days began before I even started my first year in school. And I wish now that I could go back and help rewrite it with some of the tips from Chapter 10.
It was a stressful time, my Grandfather had been in the hospital for weeks -- we all knew it was coming and yet I took it so hard when it finally happened. I still remember my two Aunts sitting at the kitchen table -- my Grandfather's favorite place in the house -- trying to fit this highly spirited human being's life in to less than 150 words. Impossible.
We got all the basic information in there and tried to make sure the important family members were mentioned, but where was the fact that my Grandfather loved coffee, would only drink that during the day. Or how much he loved his grandchildren, both human and animal. How his favorite TV show was Everybody Loves Raymond and he loved chicken parm or meatloaf at a dinner. And why didn't it say that the first time he saw me in a play, only a year before he passed, he cried in front of a crowded room of people because he was so proud of me.
I greatly appreciated the author trying to help your journalists understand the importance of good reporting on obituaries. But the sad fact is that most people -- everyday people -- are only afforded the sparce 150 words their families can afford. But I guess that's not the lesson I'm suppose to learn from this. It's good that they gave us a basic idea of what information is absolutely needed. Now I can reference that when the time comes -- as it inevitably will.
I also found it interesting when the chapter discussed the question, "how does that make you feel?" THANK YOU! Finally someone states in writing how stupid that question is. I understand the motive behind asking such a question but really-how DO you think I feel? Espically after something horrific has happened. I mean really -- grow some brains. But sometimes this insensitivity doesn't appear abnormal to some journalists going after sensationalism. I agree with the editors statement, "Newspapers aren't in the business of measuring grief."
Finally I found the policies most newspapers have regarding obituaries kind of odd but useful. For instance-not writing "in lieu of flowers please make donations..." All because of lobbying by flourists...really? What are we in politics? If that is correct information and what the family wants then why shouldn't it be printed? And secondly the absolute need for cause of death. Another ethical situation I may bring up in my next ethics question. I understand the idea of a public person being the deceased but a private individual -- why do you still need to air information that family members sometimes don't want public.
Maybe I need to toughen up a little before I approach the world of writing for the dead...
But I never imagined the first obituary I would write would be my beloved Grandfather's a little over a year ago. My obituary days began before I even started my first year in school. And I wish now that I could go back and help rewrite it with some of the tips from Chapter 10.
It was a stressful time, my Grandfather had been in the hospital for weeks -- we all knew it was coming and yet I took it so hard when it finally happened. I still remember my two Aunts sitting at the kitchen table -- my Grandfather's favorite place in the house -- trying to fit this highly spirited human being's life in to less than 150 words. Impossible.
We got all the basic information in there and tried to make sure the important family members were mentioned, but where was the fact that my Grandfather loved coffee, would only drink that during the day. Or how much he loved his grandchildren, both human and animal. How his favorite TV show was Everybody Loves Raymond and he loved chicken parm or meatloaf at a dinner. And why didn't it say that the first time he saw me in a play, only a year before he passed, he cried in front of a crowded room of people because he was so proud of me.
I greatly appreciated the author trying to help your journalists understand the importance of good reporting on obituaries. But the sad fact is that most people -- everyday people -- are only afforded the sparce 150 words their families can afford. But I guess that's not the lesson I'm suppose to learn from this. It's good that they gave us a basic idea of what information is absolutely needed. Now I can reference that when the time comes -- as it inevitably will.
I also found it interesting when the chapter discussed the question, "how does that make you feel?" THANK YOU! Finally someone states in writing how stupid that question is. I understand the motive behind asking such a question but really-how DO you think I feel? Espically after something horrific has happened. I mean really -- grow some brains. But sometimes this insensitivity doesn't appear abnormal to some journalists going after sensationalism. I agree with the editors statement, "Newspapers aren't in the business of measuring grief."
Finally I found the policies most newspapers have regarding obituaries kind of odd but useful. For instance-not writing "in lieu of flowers please make donations..." All because of lobbying by flourists...really? What are we in politics? If that is correct information and what the family wants then why shouldn't it be printed? And secondly the absolute need for cause of death. Another ethical situation I may bring up in my next ethics question. I understand the idea of a public person being the deceased but a private individual -- why do you still need to air information that family members sometimes don't want public.
Maybe I need to toughen up a little before I approach the world of writing for the dead...
Friday, September 14, 2007
Race to Disagree
Thursday evening was an important evening for any Presidential candidate, whether Republican or Democrat. President Bush laid out his benchmark plans for the Iraqi people and its government for all the nation to watch.
And the race began...
Which Democratic Presidential hopeful would be the first to be on the air, making sure that America understood how much they disagreeed?
Well -- I'm sure it comes as no surprise that toprunner Hillary Clinton was the first to make an appearance, only moments after the President's address.
But the big pull of the night came from the lagging candidate John Edwards who bravely -- and not cheaply I might add -- followed 30 minutes after the speech with his own 2 minute commercial.
"Our troops are stuck between a president without a plan to succeed and a Congress without the courage to bring them home," Edwards said according to the New York Times. With only 339 words total, Edwards did his best to sum up his campaign's stance on the war in Iraq.
But will it prove to be a profitable gamble...only time and votes will tell...
And the race began...
Which Democratic Presidential hopeful would be the first to be on the air, making sure that America understood how much they disagreeed?
Well -- I'm sure it comes as no surprise that toprunner Hillary Clinton was the first to make an appearance, only moments after the President's address.
But the big pull of the night came from the lagging candidate John Edwards who bravely -- and not cheaply I might add -- followed 30 minutes after the speech with his own 2 minute commercial.
"Our troops are stuck between a president without a plan to succeed and a Congress without the courage to bring them home," Edwards said according to the New York Times. With only 339 words total, Edwards did his best to sum up his campaign's stance on the war in Iraq.
But will it prove to be a profitable gamble...only time and votes will tell...
Quotes are Candy
Journalism for me is all about the quotes...
I don't know if it comes from my love of words and dialogue after studying acting for so long or if its just my Grandfather's ear for conversation instilled in me. I love quotes! And I'm not affraid to use them -- which may or may not prove to be a problem for me.
So Chapter Four was a nice little refresher on my favorite journalistic topic. According to the textbook, quotes add color and credibility to a story. I couldn't agree more. When I attend an event or an interview it's like I have this little tuner in my ear that beeps when I hear a good quote. I think me head even jerks a little now that I think about it.
One thing I thought was interesting was the section on not only using direct quotes but possibly setting up the actual diaglogue for more impact. I myself did that for the first time in an abbreviated way when writing the in-class assignment on David Letterman's show after 9/11. It proved to be a great way to end the story with impact and spice. Which we all know I love...
Also for me it was imporant to be reminded that sometimes using too many useless quotes can take away from the nuggets of gold that are also in the story. I have a tendancy to go overboard.
And the big homerun for me in this chapter was about correcting gramatical mistakes in quotes. I was in this play two years ago in Albany. It was kind of a big deal, a Tennesse William's play "Suddenly Last Summer" and I was the lead. I got a phone call from the big time local paper, the Albany Times Union, they wanted to interview me. Of course -- being the spotlight whore that I am -- I was exstatic and agreed immediately. When the article eventually came out I was quoted as saying "um" every other sentence. This is what people do -- we say um...BUT it does not look flattering on paper. So I always go the extra mile after that experience in making sure I portray my interviewees in the most accurate and fair light as possible. Which means occasionally deleting an um here or there.
In Using a timeline to tell a story I found it interesting that the use of graphs and tables are now becoming a large part of online journalism. It makes sense if you think about it. Newspapers also use graphs sometimes, but not to the extent of online. The capablilities of that kind of tool would be nothing but beneficial to the reader to understand intense data such as the example of the attacks of terrorism and when they occured.
In David Poulson's Media Tid-bits, he pointed out the ability journalists have to combine different people in different regions and come up with a common community. This is important in the world of "answering journalists" where blogs and commentaries are becoming more popular than hard news. Having the ability to reach a larger audience who has the choice to read your information conexts all graphics of readers. This also puts the gatekeeping role into the hands to readers who will have the ability to choose their own news. I think it's going to prove to be very beneficial to those of us leaving college and looking for jobs -- but only if we know how to capilalize on it.
I don't know if it comes from my love of words and dialogue after studying acting for so long or if its just my Grandfather's ear for conversation instilled in me. I love quotes! And I'm not affraid to use them -- which may or may not prove to be a problem for me.
So Chapter Four was a nice little refresher on my favorite journalistic topic. According to the textbook, quotes add color and credibility to a story. I couldn't agree more. When I attend an event or an interview it's like I have this little tuner in my ear that beeps when I hear a good quote. I think me head even jerks a little now that I think about it.
One thing I thought was interesting was the section on not only using direct quotes but possibly setting up the actual diaglogue for more impact. I myself did that for the first time in an abbreviated way when writing the in-class assignment on David Letterman's show after 9/11. It proved to be a great way to end the story with impact and spice. Which we all know I love...
Also for me it was imporant to be reminded that sometimes using too many useless quotes can take away from the nuggets of gold that are also in the story. I have a tendancy to go overboard.
And the big homerun for me in this chapter was about correcting gramatical mistakes in quotes. I was in this play two years ago in Albany. It was kind of a big deal, a Tennesse William's play "Suddenly Last Summer" and I was the lead. I got a phone call from the big time local paper, the Albany Times Union, they wanted to interview me. Of course -- being the spotlight whore that I am -- I was exstatic and agreed immediately. When the article eventually came out I was quoted as saying "um" every other sentence. This is what people do -- we say um...BUT it does not look flattering on paper. So I always go the extra mile after that experience in making sure I portray my interviewees in the most accurate and fair light as possible. Which means occasionally deleting an um here or there.
In Using a timeline to tell a story I found it interesting that the use of graphs and tables are now becoming a large part of online journalism. It makes sense if you think about it. Newspapers also use graphs sometimes, but not to the extent of online. The capablilities of that kind of tool would be nothing but beneficial to the reader to understand intense data such as the example of the attacks of terrorism and when they occured.
In David Poulson's Media Tid-bits, he pointed out the ability journalists have to combine different people in different regions and come up with a common community. This is important in the world of "answering journalists" where blogs and commentaries are becoming more popular than hard news. Having the ability to reach a larger audience who has the choice to read your information conexts all graphics of readers. This also puts the gatekeeping role into the hands to readers who will have the ability to choose their own news. I think it's going to prove to be very beneficial to those of us leaving college and looking for jobs -- but only if we know how to capilalize on it.
Monday, September 10, 2007
The Next Reagan?
After much hype and tension in the Republican Party over whether or not the former Senator of Tennessee Fred D. Thompson was going to run for his parties presidential nomination -- the rumors became true. On the NBC's "Tonight Show with Jay Leno."
In the words of MSNBC's Chris Matthews, "we waited for this?"
Color me underwhelmed...and a democrat...but I find this late runner another washy Republican that will just mix up an already divided party. Well I say, the more the merrier!
To make the September 5 evening announcment even more unimpressive, Thompson did it while eight of his rivals were actually participating in a much heated debate. Even some of the Republican frontrunners took time out of their busy campaign schedules to take a shot at the newcomer on the block.
"I think Fred is a really, really good man. I think he's done a pretty good job of playing my part on 'Law & Order.'" said former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani of Thompson according to the Washington Post.
But sadly, some voters are acting excited about this 65-year-old once T.V. star. Some are even murmoring the word "Reagan" along with his name. Now those of us who understand the God-like personification of former President Ronald Reagan that is held and formed by many Republican voters, also understand the possible danger Thompson could pose in the short months to come. His dangerous mixture of ultra conservatisim, southern roots and that crazy star appeal are frighteningly close to the movie star President.
In the past week, Thompson has been making up for lost time by busing his way accross Iowa and some of New Hampshire. But most reporters are noting the ever constant stump speech of the former Senator that seems to convey any actual stance. According to Susan Saulny of the New York Times, Thompson could not be pinned down by voters questions regarding important matters such as healthcare and education. And when answering questions regarding the hot topic of homosexuality he danced around the issue like a skilled performer.
"I think that we should not have discrimination, but that we should not set aside categories to give special set-aside treatments for, and treatments to," said Thompson according to the New York TImes article. WHAT? I mean really, who understood that answer? And how do you answer a question about homosexuality without using the actual word -- homosexuality?
I spoke to my Grandmother about this new runner -- she's my moral guidance on pretty much everything. And as someone who not only lived through "Reaganomics" but somehow survived raising four children on a low-middle class income during the Presidency -- all she could do was shake her head disapprovingly. I think that says it all.
www.fred08.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/05/AR2007090502602_pf.html
In the words of MSNBC's Chris Matthews, "we waited for this?"
Color me underwhelmed...and a democrat...but I find this late runner another washy Republican that will just mix up an already divided party. Well I say, the more the merrier!
To make the September 5 evening announcment even more unimpressive, Thompson did it while eight of his rivals were actually participating in a much heated debate. Even some of the Republican frontrunners took time out of their busy campaign schedules to take a shot at the newcomer on the block.
"I think Fred is a really, really good man. I think he's done a pretty good job of playing my part on 'Law & Order.'" said former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani of Thompson according to the Washington Post.
But sadly, some voters are acting excited about this 65-year-old once T.V. star. Some are even murmoring the word "Reagan" along with his name. Now those of us who understand the God-like personification of former President Ronald Reagan that is held and formed by many Republican voters, also understand the possible danger Thompson could pose in the short months to come. His dangerous mixture of ultra conservatisim, southern roots and that crazy star appeal are frighteningly close to the movie star President.
In the past week, Thompson has been making up for lost time by busing his way accross Iowa and some of New Hampshire. But most reporters are noting the ever constant stump speech of the former Senator that seems to convey any actual stance. According to Susan Saulny of the New York Times, Thompson could not be pinned down by voters questions regarding important matters such as healthcare and education. And when answering questions regarding the hot topic of homosexuality he danced around the issue like a skilled performer.
"I think that we should not have discrimination, but that we should not set aside categories to give special set-aside treatments for, and treatments to," said Thompson according to the New York TImes article. WHAT? I mean really, who understood that answer? And how do you answer a question about homosexuality without using the actual word -- homosexuality?
I spoke to my Grandmother about this new runner -- she's my moral guidance on pretty much everything. And as someone who not only lived through "Reaganomics" but somehow survived raising four children on a low-middle class income during the Presidency -- all she could do was shake her head disapprovingly. I think that says it all.
www.fred08.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/05/AR2007090502602_pf.html
Friday, September 7, 2007
The Nature of News and Where to Place the Question Mark...
One of my professors recently asked my class, "What is news?"
Silence...cricket....cricket...
It's funny right? A class of 25 or more bright young minds can't even answer a basic question about the core of their chosen profession. And yet sadly, I was in the same boat as the rest of them.
Chapter one of the textbook does the best it can to explain what is news, and what makes good news for that matter.
The basic criteria makes sense: relevance, usefulness and interest. But it's the judging the of the community you write for that's the tricky part I believe. My steadfast rule when thinking in the mindset of writing for a small town newspaper is, "would my Grandmother want to read this."
My Grandmother for as long as I can remember reads her local paper everyday and even goes as far as to cut out articles that she feels pertains to her grand children's lives. It's really funny actually, how she gave my 13-year-old self an article she found on how to treat acne or most recently one about what makes a good journalist. And yes, I have rolled my eyes and smiled politely but when you think about it -- she is the reader we are all writing for.
My Grandmother understands what events in her community have impact and relevance to her life. She also enjoys the occasional novelty story that makes her chuckle. And above all else -- the proximity of any event is what catches her eye first. So I try to remember all of these things when writing a story-especially the lead. What is going to catch my Grandmother's eye first?
In chapter two the idea of being a multimedia journalist is pounded into us. And rightly so. Yesterday a Professor told me never to say what kind of writer/journalist I am. Instead of being a print journalist or a script writer, just be a journalist or a writer. Never limit yourself he told me. And in a world where journalists are required to know three different types of media he was so right. Another interesting point made in chapter two was the advice about working in a basic newsroom. It reminded me that it is okay to ask to be shown around -- knowing more than just your section of the newspaper is important.
In chapter three the very important skills of interviewing were reviewed. It's always good to refresh my memory with interviewing tips. It seems that I have a past of slipping away from the basics. For me, preparation is key to a good interview. If I have the tools I feel confident and in control of the interview. If I don't, I flounder around for information and almost come off as embarrassed, which is not a good thing at all. Another thing I learned from the chapter was not to ask leading questions. After looking at some of the examples I went back and looked at some of my notes from recent interviews, I was using leading questions without even realizing it! I'm now going to have to pay attention to that when preparing.
Finally, I read the punctuation section of our AP Stylebook. I have to say, every time I go back to the Stylebook I am reminded how much it makes me feel warm and fuzzy -- like a security blanket for journalists.
After our papers were handed back last week I noticed that I had made a few punctuation errors that I didn't understand. For instance, I wrote "sibling's births" and didn't know why the apostrophe had to go after the s. But under the ever helpful apostrophe section it was noted that was the case when plural nouns ended in s. For example: churches' needs, the girls' toys and states' rights. Now I know! Also, I found out that when writing about someones political affiliation you don't set it off with parenthesis, but with comas. Always a good type in the midst of an election season.
Overall it was good to take a look at the chapter and remind myself it is there. Now I know what is covered in the back, so if I have a question regarding something I'm writing I can look back to it and check.
Silence...cricket....cricket...
It's funny right? A class of 25 or more bright young minds can't even answer a basic question about the core of their chosen profession. And yet sadly, I was in the same boat as the rest of them.
Chapter one of the textbook does the best it can to explain what is news, and what makes good news for that matter.
The basic criteria makes sense: relevance, usefulness and interest. But it's the judging the of the community you write for that's the tricky part I believe. My steadfast rule when thinking in the mindset of writing for a small town newspaper is, "would my Grandmother want to read this."
My Grandmother for as long as I can remember reads her local paper everyday and even goes as far as to cut out articles that she feels pertains to her grand children's lives. It's really funny actually, how she gave my 13-year-old self an article she found on how to treat acne or most recently one about what makes a good journalist. And yes, I have rolled my eyes and smiled politely but when you think about it -- she is the reader we are all writing for.
My Grandmother understands what events in her community have impact and relevance to her life. She also enjoys the occasional novelty story that makes her chuckle. And above all else -- the proximity of any event is what catches her eye first. So I try to remember all of these things when writing a story-especially the lead. What is going to catch my Grandmother's eye first?
In chapter two the idea of being a multimedia journalist is pounded into us. And rightly so. Yesterday a Professor told me never to say what kind of writer/journalist I am. Instead of being a print journalist or a script writer, just be a journalist or a writer. Never limit yourself he told me. And in a world where journalists are required to know three different types of media he was so right. Another interesting point made in chapter two was the advice about working in a basic newsroom. It reminded me that it is okay to ask to be shown around -- knowing more than just your section of the newspaper is important.
In chapter three the very important skills of interviewing were reviewed. It's always good to refresh my memory with interviewing tips. It seems that I have a past of slipping away from the basics. For me, preparation is key to a good interview. If I have the tools I feel confident and in control of the interview. If I don't, I flounder around for information and almost come off as embarrassed, which is not a good thing at all. Another thing I learned from the chapter was not to ask leading questions. After looking at some of the examples I went back and looked at some of my notes from recent interviews, I was using leading questions without even realizing it! I'm now going to have to pay attention to that when preparing.
Finally, I read the punctuation section of our AP Stylebook. I have to say, every time I go back to the Stylebook I am reminded how much it makes me feel warm and fuzzy -- like a security blanket for journalists.
After our papers were handed back last week I noticed that I had made a few punctuation errors that I didn't understand. For instance, I wrote "sibling's births" and didn't know why the apostrophe had to go after the s. But under the ever helpful apostrophe section it was noted that was the case when plural nouns ended in s. For example: churches' needs, the girls' toys and states' rights. Now I know! Also, I found out that when writing about someones political affiliation you don't set it off with parenthesis, but with comas. Always a good type in the midst of an election season.
Overall it was good to take a look at the chapter and remind myself it is there. Now I know what is covered in the back, so if I have a question regarding something I'm writing I can look back to it and check.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
The Future of News
Its alarming to be studying a profession that seems to be fading away. Even with the onslaught on online journalism, things are looking bleak for those of us studying the craft. These are worries we all should have and voice, because we are the only ones who can someday bring journalism back to where it once was.
The 2007 State of the News Media report was a major wake-up call to this 23-year-old sophmore at the start of her new career. I was always led to believe that online news would save us all -- be the next big job market for those of us looking for stability. But according to this report the online news world has hit a steady hault at 92 million viewers.
What is needed is a new business model. How do small local newspapers compete with the cheap advertising of the internet. Even larger institutions such as the New York Times are starting to see the error of their ways. Afraid of losing money, they like so many other newspapers, tried charging a subscription fee to internet users who were already paying hefty prices for access to the web. I myself turned away from such a method and would go to the cheaper version of aol news, sad as that may seem.
The report also brings up the heart of the issue of advertising by pointing out the need for a new model of measuring media audiences. Without knowing how many really read their newspaper or watch the evening news, how can media outlets convince advertisers their's is the best place to buy add space? Even circulation isn't cutting it anymore for newspapers -- how many people read a paper that someone else left behind after their coffee?
Its only now that journalists are starting to see this trend that has been growing for years. Will it be too late to do something about it?
The 2007 State of the News Media report was a major wake-up call to this 23-year-old sophmore at the start of her new career. I was always led to believe that online news would save us all -- be the next big job market for those of us looking for stability. But according to this report the online news world has hit a steady hault at 92 million viewers.
What is needed is a new business model. How do small local newspapers compete with the cheap advertising of the internet. Even larger institutions such as the New York Times are starting to see the error of their ways. Afraid of losing money, they like so many other newspapers, tried charging a subscription fee to internet users who were already paying hefty prices for access to the web. I myself turned away from such a method and would go to the cheaper version of aol news, sad as that may seem.
The report also brings up the heart of the issue of advertising by pointing out the need for a new model of measuring media audiences. Without knowing how many really read their newspaper or watch the evening news, how can media outlets convince advertisers their's is the best place to buy add space? Even circulation isn't cutting it anymore for newspapers -- how many people read a paper that someone else left behind after their coffee?
Its only now that journalists are starting to see this trend that has been growing for years. Will it be too late to do something about it?
The Giant Pumpkin in the room
In the next four months of furious campaigning for the Democratic Primaries one word is going to be key -- experience.
Over Labor Day weekend a major shift took place in the stead fast machine known as Hillary Clinton's campagin for President. A shift that will press the point of her experience in Washington over her opponents -- most notibly Presidential hopefuls Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.).
"I know some people think you have to choose between change and experience," Clinton said on Sunday at a rally in New Hampshire according to the Washington Post. "Well, with me, you don't have to choose. I have spent my whole life fighting for change." Without directly naming her Democratic opponents, Clinton took the first steps towards a more aggressive stance on her past experiences as First Lady and Senator of New York.
I've always found this arguement interesting, the idea of who has the most "experience." If voters really look at the top three candidates, none boast a strong past in Washington Politics. At best they all hold Senate experience and are heavy on domestic issues. But in a time of war and conflict internationally, who is best to take over?
I once had a great Poltics professor here at Ithaca say to me during a discussion of Clinton's experience compared to the other candidates, "She's not the goddess of experience ya' know." And I can't help but think of that when reading the coverage of her weekend in New Hampshire. The New York Times also pointed out Clinton's references to "working the system." This I have to agree is something she does know more about than some of the others in the ring. As First Lady she tried to stage a major overhaul of our nation's healthcare and bombed miserably. Now most who don't understand the circumstances blame her and her "socialist" ways for that. But sadly, Clinton had to learn the hard way how to play with the big dogs on Capitol Hill.
In the end I think the holiday weekend was a successful next step in her campaign. Along with meeting various voters she and her husband also had time to stop and peruse the local state fair. Washington Post reporter Dan Balz had an interesting take on the power couple's outing that I think everyone should read for a good laugh.
Over Labor Day weekend a major shift took place in the stead fast machine known as Hillary Clinton's campagin for President. A shift that will press the point of her experience in Washington over her opponents -- most notibly Presidential hopefuls Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and former senator John Edwards (D-N.C.).
"I know some people think you have to choose between change and experience," Clinton said on Sunday at a rally in New Hampshire according to the Washington Post. "Well, with me, you don't have to choose. I have spent my whole life fighting for change." Without directly naming her Democratic opponents, Clinton took the first steps towards a more aggressive stance on her past experiences as First Lady and Senator of New York.
I've always found this arguement interesting, the idea of who has the most "experience." If voters really look at the top three candidates, none boast a strong past in Washington Politics. At best they all hold Senate experience and are heavy on domestic issues. But in a time of war and conflict internationally, who is best to take over?
I once had a great Poltics professor here at Ithaca say to me during a discussion of Clinton's experience compared to the other candidates, "She's not the goddess of experience ya' know." And I can't help but think of that when reading the coverage of her weekend in New Hampshire. The New York Times also pointed out Clinton's references to "working the system." This I have to agree is something she does know more about than some of the others in the ring. As First Lady she tried to stage a major overhaul of our nation's healthcare and bombed miserably. Now most who don't understand the circumstances blame her and her "socialist" ways for that. But sadly, Clinton had to learn the hard way how to play with the big dogs on Capitol Hill.
In the end I think the holiday weekend was a successful next step in her campaign. Along with meeting various voters she and her husband also had time to stop and peruse the local state fair. Washington Post reporter Dan Balz had an interesting take on the power couple's outing that I think everyone should read for a good laugh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)