Readings for 3/25

The RTNDA says that journalists' first obligation is to the PUBLIC. It's the first one - and people still forget it. I still see journalists pandering to private interest, and shying away from holding people accountable. I am glad to see that the RTNDA has not forgotten about the public, and also, the magic word: integrity. It's hard to define, but we know it's important. RTNDA says it involves "decency" and "identifying sources." In a way, it's a little sad that we have to put these things on paper before they are assumed by today's practitioners. In terms of video and audio editing, we must use special effects as little as possible. This is a tough one for me - today's audience loves special effects, transitions, and dramatic editing, etc. It is a difficult issue for current journalists - do we keep our audience satisfied or follow an ethical code? I think this has to be decided on a case-by-case basis, depending on the level of sensitivity in the situation. Of course, we need to be mindful of teases and avoid changing the meaning of any of our content.
I was sad to read a person disappointed with all of the major outlooks today, but I see the point in this article. I can't tell you how angry it makes me that women are committing suicide because they are unpleased with their bodies because they have seen a magazine with a Photo-shopped, skinny model. I feel the same way with journalism: DONT CHANGE REALITY. You can make things pretty, and landscapes dramatic, but we cannot alter anything that would change the meaning. Fred makes a great point: " It is the designer's solemn duty to carefully honor the thin line between selling a product and ethical representations of places, people and things." In St. Paul they said this "General Policy - Do NOT run photos of the governor, mayor, etc. signing proclamations, receiving plaques, looking at a check or piece of paper, etc. Avoid posed news photos of politicians immediately prior to elections." I don't understand. Why? Why can't we have mayors looking at a piece of paper or signing a proclamation? A signing is a NEWS event, and I find that completely valid. I think the recent issue of Obama allowing the photography of caskets. With this, personally, I have no problem. Honestly, death is a REAL issue. And I dont' think that we can deprive the public of a sense of the level of death that is going on. I mean, a single deathis unacceptable to show a body. But with something like war, we need to give people an accurate sense of thing and it is unethical to BLOCK photography of bodies and coffins.
Finally, I like that Poynter is seeking to evolve and is allowing the opportunity for feedback. I'm thinking about submitting a letter to him, myself.

Political Coverage

I find that an important, but often overlooked aspect of journalism and politics has to do not exactly with coverage of ISSUES but of coverage of CANDIDATES. All channels of journalism can provide people with quotes from candidates, with campaign slogans, and photographs. However, I find that the profiles that are provided on journalistic websites are often integral to a person's viewpoint on them. If a person consistently uses Fox News, or watches CNN, will tend to turn to that specific coverage in order to form their impression of a candidate. I (of course) chose to review the profiles that are provided by CNN, The New York Times, and BBC News about Barack Obama. While it is not a flashing headline, or scrolling as a ticker, the profiles are often visited.
On the CNN website, the data provides his previous jobs, family, religion, education, and campaign website. Those are the bulleted points that appear next to his picture. As the reader scrolls down, I find it very interesting that the next available set of data has his totals in terms of money spending and earning. This places an emphasis on this aspect of his campaign. Further down, there is the obvious standing of how he is doing in the polls. I appreciate the fact that off to the right side, there is a list of his standings on important issues. However, just below lies my greatest pet peeve: a list of celebrities and famous names who either support or oppose him, and the totals that they have donated.
The New York Times, however, provides a much different set of data. The profile is more extensive, and includes information about his political experience and his children. Instead of graphics and subheadings, however, this site contains archives of articles about Obama that have been featured in the New York Times. There are opportunities to research financing and supporters, but it would involve clicking on another link. (THANK YOU, NY Times!)
Finally, the BBC simply provides an article, a feature-type story that describes Obama. The subheading is quite enticing: "Rock Star and beach Babe are not labels normally applied to US Senators." While I do enjoy the BBC, there is a very clear impression of Barack Obama given in the opening. He seems to be portrayed as a young contender for the Presidency with little experience and a glamorous appearance. There are links to more information about his life on the side of the page, but I think that the best format is on the other 2 webpages. It is much easier for the typical reader to break down the facts about education, etc., than to sit down and search an article for these facts.

Reading for the Week

The Poynter article is an important one in the context of our last assignment. I can certainly understand the laziness of student journalists. I think that it easy for us to discredit ourselves - "I'm just a student," "no one will know," "I'm not a real journalist yet, so it doesn't matter" and the like. I also, however, can understand why the school wanted to set a strong precedent and to declare punishment of the person involved, because he is supposed to be setting an example. After all, the point of education is that it simulates reality in a career, and plaigarism is unacceptable. "In forums since, including Poynter Online and the Missourian, professional ethicists, practicing journalists, former students and colleagues of Merrill, and Missouri faculty members have been divided over both the allegation of plagiarism and the punishment exacted."
Pulling quotes is a form of plaigarism that is unacceptable for faculty to disrespect.
After reading Merrill's defense, it is easy to see his point of view. It was simple carelessness, in revealing information that he felt was "public domain."
The last reading from Poynter is a very useful resource. At first glance, it looks like a mixture of different links, and appears confusing. But when I looked at it closer, I found that it was a great culmination of tips on researching candidates in an election. I found the wires to be especially important as compilations of issues provide for organization of different subjects. I also appreciate the "New Ideas in Coverage Section." I think that journalists try to ignore all bias in many ways, but I think that awareness of influential sites like moveon.org helps us to be more well-rounded.

08

My journalism research piece was about YouTube, and the changing pace and evolution of online video, news, and search. Recently in the NY Times, an article tied this together. It seems that political candidates are makings stops at the Google headquarters consistently so that they can be seen at the forefront of technological innovation. This is important on a number of levels. First, Google is at the helm of culture. Executives there have a strong grasp on exactly what the public knows and doesn't, and what they are curious about and need to know. That said, the CEO of Google asks questions to candidates in an open forum. According to the article, candidates do not know in advance about the topics that they will be asked to cover. "With his Google visit, however, Senator Obama succeeded in drawing attention to his plans for using technology to make government more accessible and transparent with, for example, live Internet feeds of all executive branch department and agency meetings." I think this is a great idea. The article also mentions an important aspect of our culture. The video "I've Got a Crush On Obama" is a video of a superficially good-looking girl singing lyrics about the candidate. 4 million people have viewed it. As much as this scares me, I think that it's a good idea to examine cultural patterns like this, and be open to addressing why they exist. For example, YouTube has invented You Choose 08 for the population that is interested in using the new media to obtain information.

Reading for the Week

I consider Poynter online to be a great source for journalistic resources. I agreed strongly with the comment by Weiss in which he stated, "As a photojournalist, I like to think there's some built-in idea of the rememberance of a still image." This is part of the reason that I enjoy broadcasting - it is another element of story-telling. I also appreciate his regard for all types of journalism. Instead of asserting his own personal views, he admits that there are strengths to video, audio, and print journalism. I also agree that the photojournalism deserves more respect from reporters, and I think that this is an important subject to address. I also laughed when I read "Journalism, gotta do it." I fell in love with the field of journalism in a similar way- I just knew it. Finally, I like that he wanted to make the program available, accessible and affordable for all journalists. Seems like a great guy.

Reading for the Week

The readings for this week deal with the most important part of a college journalism education - ethics. The first part of the reading, the sidebar, gives an elementary look at components of ethics - responsibility, freedom of the press, independence, sincerity, truthfulness, accuracy, impartiality, fair play and decency. Among these, I find sincerity and good faith to be the most fundamental to journalism. This is because I see stories on a situational basis. Some cases require different amounts and types of attention. As long as there is good intention, I think that is the most important thing. On the other hand, I find impartiality to be the most difficult because as humans, people form opinions and emotions based on surroundings.
The rest of the chapter discusses principles. The first is the Potter Box, which examines the steps to making a moral decision, which include selecting loyalties and values. This looks good on paper, but it is much more difficult to apply in real life situations. Next, it deals with common ethical problems such as deceit, conflict of interest, (surprisingly) friendship, payola and freebies. Again, I think that it is very difficult to decipher ethical boundaries because it should be situational. It is an individual prerogative to balance friendships and work, etc. On the other hand, journalists MUST in all situations, avoid plagiarism and invasion of privacy.
The first website given in the reading I found to be highly offensive. I do not think that it is fair to call newspaper's online videos superior to TV journalism. The author found one example about Anna Nicole Smith, on one channel, by one journalist. Generalizing to say that TV is salacious but that online represents something more sophisticated is just plain unfair. I support newspapers "giving [online video] it a whirl" but media should work together with this to strive for quality, and not work against one another.
The second website provided useful canons for reporting. I liked what the blogger wrote about developing a style. As painful as it is to admit, she did address the problems that many people have with broadcast news, including the mechanical voice used by reporters.
"People ranging from Mother Teresa (“If I look at the mass, I will never act. If I look at the one, I will”) to, reportedly, Stalin (“A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic”)." This excerpt is a fascinating concept, especially to journalists, because it poses a major threat. It means that by showing wide perspective, it may be contributing to societal distancing and numbing. I agree with the author's assertion that journalists should still show the "statistics" and the wide view, but should also include features that will stir the viewers/listeners/reader's emotions and may spur them to act, or at the very least, feel.
The final website talks about the interactive quality of modern journalism - from slideshows to quizzes to live streams. The article is important because with the evolution of the field comes the evolution of individual journalists. It is important for us to be well-rounded and understand the different aspects, because modern jobs will require it. As the reading states, "Combine the best of each world."

Reading for the Week

The reading for this week deals with writing for broadcast versus print (finally!). I have been waiting to read and learn more about this because it is what I am most interested in. Most of what I have learned about writing for Television has come from fellow students at Newswatch 16, so it is nice to have a professional text give advice. It was nice to see that the concepts that I have taught to assistant producers and freshman this semester is accurate. For example, television writing is much more conversational than print. The stories should be shorther (20-30 seconds to read), and should explain the concepts succintly and avoid using superfluous or complex language. Television is much more visual than print, so when writing a story, TV producers must keep this in mind. A similarity, however, is the emphasis on flow of reading. Writers for television, radio, or print should write so that the sentences transition well into one another and do not impede the reader's progress in deciphering the information. This tight phrasing is something that I have always emphasized with the news crew of Newswatch 16.