Best Headlines of the Year
This was great. It is difficult to discern whether or not the ambiguity of the headlines were intentional or not. One first read, several of the headlines were very humorous and I had a difficult time after rereading them to understand the 'intended' message. Some could argue that these are examples are headlines not well thought out. I think it is a genius approach. I would be more compelled to read an article that had an odd sounding headline. Despite my early disappointment in finding that the story is about what I originally thought, I would continue to read the story because, intentional or not, I appreciate the misconceived novelty.
favorites: Juvenile Court to Try Shooting Defendant
Drunks Get Nine Months in Violin Case
Astronaut Soars Across Headlines
Puns can get out of hand? Get out of town. I understand the concern of getting carried away, particularly in this astronaut love triangle story. I can understand if the articles written about the story were skewed, that is not legit. However, I feel that the headlines are the main areas of concern regarding this story. 'Lust in Space' is a damn good headline if you ask me. Theoretically, the great part of American journalism is that there are so many outlets (I disagree considering the conglomerate, however we can't forget the blogosphere). If people are concerned that this story got out of hand and eclipsed the other 'real' news stories of the week... I say your not looking hard enough to find the news that you want.
Comparing The Bailout Headlines
This link made me think about causation. I'm a conspiracy buff and always think there is some greater invisible entity dictating to us peons. The bailout headlines, particularly The New York Times, illustrates the power of suggestion, intentional or not. If the bailout is referred to as HUGE... and then the market goes down the shitter... should we be surprised? I'm not the best reference for enforcing the traditional notion of the objectivity and serving the public interest... however, I'll pretend. If The NY Times is the bastion of journalism and public interest... how can you be suggestive when describing a piece of legislation that has a global impact? The suggestion itself can create a reality otherwise inconceivable. The problem is the power a single publication has. These suggestive bailout headlines wouldn't hurt so badly if they did not have a global readership.
Blagojevich’s Home State Headlines
I enjoy the unattributed and unnecessarily quoted statements in these headlines. None of these front pages offer Blagojevich an inch of space to state his claims. The entire design of these fronts suggests that Blagojevich is guilty -- his tight lips, scrunched eyebrows. The Daily Herald does an interesting job of grabbing a dirty quote out of context. Considering that all of these fronts out of Illinois, I can understand the negative portrayal. I'd be pissed.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Ethical Journalism
Commandment 23
Relationship to source
My publication would not have such a narrow restriction on source relations. If my writer tees up at 10 am every other Sunday with the head of the police department that is ok. "It is essential that we preserve a professional detachment, free of any whiff of bias." Story selection is itself bias -- not an issue of public interest. In order to write a good story I feel it is often necessary to informally know your source/subject. All the writer has to do is say, 'while smoking a backwoods cigar on the rough of the 7th hole.... so and so said.' Don't underestimate the freedom of transparency.
Accepting Hospitality from Sources
I have a big problem with the whole gift receiving issue. The fact that some organization is willing to wine and dine a reporter is a story in itself. I don't believe in objectivity so free drinks and a meal will not be the unconscious motives fueling a 'bias'. My writers can take up any freebies offered as long as they report it to me and if it is questionable it will be printed with the article.... I believe I remember The Times saying that the real employers are the readers...
Sample Letters
The declining a gift/unsolicited award letters are pretty funny -- the air of insincerity reflects more poorly on The Times than accepting a gift or award. I would require my writers to send an acceptance thank you letter. I don't condone taking a gift without saying thank you.
Relationship to source
My publication would not have such a narrow restriction on source relations. If my writer tees up at 10 am every other Sunday with the head of the police department that is ok. "It is essential that we preserve a professional detachment, free of any whiff of bias." Story selection is itself bias -- not an issue of public interest. In order to write a good story I feel it is often necessary to informally know your source/subject. All the writer has to do is say, 'while smoking a backwoods cigar on the rough of the 7th hole.... so and so said.' Don't underestimate the freedom of transparency.
Accepting Hospitality from Sources
I have a big problem with the whole gift receiving issue. The fact that some organization is willing to wine and dine a reporter is a story in itself. I don't believe in objectivity so free drinks and a meal will not be the unconscious motives fueling a 'bias'. My writers can take up any freebies offered as long as they report it to me and if it is questionable it will be printed with the article.... I believe I remember The Times saying that the real employers are the readers...
Sample Letters
The declining a gift/unsolicited award letters are pretty funny -- the air of insincerity reflects more poorly on The Times than accepting a gift or award. I would require my writers to send an acceptance thank you letter. I don't condone taking a gift without saying thank you.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Ethics
Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
It is interesting that electronic journalists should adhere to their own code of ethics. The RTNDA code appears to be the same, if not very similar, to the traditional code of ethics for journalists. Distinguishing a unique code for electronic journalists creates, in my mind, a schism between traditional journalists and neo-journalists. The divide is not necessary. I understand that new rules must be addressed involving multimedia and video/audio deception, however, is it not true that electronic journalists simply integrate the traditional mediums of print/radio/broadcast?
It's been a while since I last read the code of ethics... and it is hard for me to believe that many professionals abide by these standards. The concept of diversity parallels this weeks text reading. The majority of news coverage I am exposed to does little to provide diverse coverage. Perhaps journalists are eliminating controversial language, however, the lack of diversity is implicit. Global news coverage still highlights photographs of the poor, black woman balancing a water jug on her head while a baby with a swollen belly is strapped to her back. Our concept of poverty and the US agenda of foreign aid are reinforced by our domestic coverage. Our ethnocentric coverage only perpetuates the concept of 'the others' and neo-imperialism via the form of aid. If we are discussing electronic journalism we cannot ignore the reach of such medium... this reach is global and the news coverage must reflect the global realities.
Guidelines for Ethical Video and Audio Editing
This article reminded me the of palliative care videos I showed for my presentation. On the surface, the Dallas news org would not pass the ethics code. Perhaps my strong emotions were the result of fancy photo editing. My question is where does the responsibility lay? In the journalists or the audience. I am not condoning deception, however where are the critical readers/viewers? Since there is no such thing as objectivity, shouldn't receivers of news approach all news critically?
Our final project places an emphasis on editorial opinion. We are selecting the 20 most important stories of the day for our young adult audience. Audience loyalty grows from a shared opinion of issues. My audience, before knowing what our 20-something site is all about, logs on with expectations. It just seems contradictory to specify video/audio techniques that should be avoidable for fear of wavering too far from the line of objectivity, when the reporter, no matter how stringent she is to adhere to objective guidelines, is subjective... subject not only in the reality that she witnessed only one angle... but she herself is a for of media that communicates the subject view of some other witness. Perhaps if the industry was not so implicit about its subjectivity our audience would be forced to read/view/listen critically. It is an endless cycle of disillusion.
Ethics in Digital Photography
I have a difficult time deciphering the difference between the subjectivity of a photograph and the subjectivity of editing a photograph. A photo is a visual representation of a particular view point. Even if two photo j's stood in the same location they could capture and view different situations. Editing a photo creates the same conflict only now involving digital technology.
Considering this I still would not alter an image for my publication. Just because subjectivity consumes the photo from its conception does not compel me to further this process. A photojournalism code of ethics is obsolete in my opinion.
Photojournalism Ethics Guidelines
The Texarkana Gazette dead body policy is interesting. I enjoy how the industry can draw lines between what is right and wrong. I don't believe I would include photo's of dead bodies in my publication. The main question is the inherent news value of the photograph. Or is it? I appreciate the Gazette's attempt to exist within a community. We are not photographing and interviewing subjects... we are working with and for humans. It is interesting how there is causation between selling papers and printing content that appears controversial or taboo. I question our motives of death and devastation. Why show a glimpse of humanity in refusing to print photos of dead bodies... when a microphone/camera/tape recorder is easily thrust in the face of a family member who is viewing the dead body for the first?
Helter Skelter No More: An Evolving Guidebook for Online Ethics
"Are we comfortable with journalists who are not opinion columnists expressing more voice in their blogs than they can in the paper?":
That question parallels the concept that journalists cannot donate to political campaigns and the gamete conflict of interest issues. Majority of journalists are just an unknown byline. I don't believe anyone who claims to be objective and that their work reflects such objectivity. I don't know how many more times I can address this issue. I want my writers to keep a public blog. If my readers are informed of my writers opinions then the readers are better able to critically read the paper. If writers are given a medium to express their voice I feel that voice will less likely spill onto the 'news'.
"One area that's not really sorted out is the issue of what commentators can link to. Clearly porn sites are a no-no, but what about links to videos or photos of dead and wounded or politically inflammatory sites?":
If there are so many avenues were the writers voice may appear wouldn't one begin to critically debate objectivity? If a reader's understanding of a story is manipulated by a possibly suggestive link... who is at fault? I say the public school system and our societal priorities.
Online Journalism Ethics: Guidelines from the Conference
I enjoyed skimming the guidlines' FAQ. Transparency is the buzzword I am most interested in. I'm drawn to a memory of Christian Amanpour deferring questions of opinion to husband James Rubin during their lecture a couple of years ago. It is obvious that Amanpour has opinions. All writers must have opinions, especially due to their exposure to information. Why am I left guessing? I would think opinions are based at some level on an expertise or knowledge of a particular subject. Tell me what you saw and what factors influenced what you saw. Then I will ask the same of another writer on the scene. If we can intrude upon any subject why shouldn't our readers do the same to us? Why are we hiding behind the guise of objectivity?
It is interesting that electronic journalists should adhere to their own code of ethics. The RTNDA code appears to be the same, if not very similar, to the traditional code of ethics for journalists. Distinguishing a unique code for electronic journalists creates, in my mind, a schism between traditional journalists and neo-journalists. The divide is not necessary. I understand that new rules must be addressed involving multimedia and video/audio deception, however, is it not true that electronic journalists simply integrate the traditional mediums of print/radio/broadcast?
It's been a while since I last read the code of ethics... and it is hard for me to believe that many professionals abide by these standards. The concept of diversity parallels this weeks text reading. The majority of news coverage I am exposed to does little to provide diverse coverage. Perhaps journalists are eliminating controversial language, however, the lack of diversity is implicit. Global news coverage still highlights photographs of the poor, black woman balancing a water jug on her head while a baby with a swollen belly is strapped to her back. Our concept of poverty and the US agenda of foreign aid are reinforced by our domestic coverage. Our ethnocentric coverage only perpetuates the concept of 'the others' and neo-imperialism via the form of aid. If we are discussing electronic journalism we cannot ignore the reach of such medium... this reach is global and the news coverage must reflect the global realities.
Guidelines for Ethical Video and Audio Editing
This article reminded me the of palliative care videos I showed for my presentation. On the surface, the Dallas news org would not pass the ethics code. Perhaps my strong emotions were the result of fancy photo editing. My question is where does the responsibility lay? In the journalists or the audience. I am not condoning deception, however where are the critical readers/viewers? Since there is no such thing as objectivity, shouldn't receivers of news approach all news critically?
Our final project places an emphasis on editorial opinion. We are selecting the 20 most important stories of the day for our young adult audience. Audience loyalty grows from a shared opinion of issues. My audience, before knowing what our 20-something site is all about, logs on with expectations. It just seems contradictory to specify video/audio techniques that should be avoidable for fear of wavering too far from the line of objectivity, when the reporter, no matter how stringent she is to adhere to objective guidelines, is subjective... subject not only in the reality that she witnessed only one angle... but she herself is a for of media that communicates the subject view of some other witness. Perhaps if the industry was not so implicit about its subjectivity our audience would be forced to read/view/listen critically. It is an endless cycle of disillusion.
Ethics in Digital Photography
I have a difficult time deciphering the difference between the subjectivity of a photograph and the subjectivity of editing a photograph. A photo is a visual representation of a particular view point. Even if two photo j's stood in the same location they could capture and view different situations. Editing a photo creates the same conflict only now involving digital technology.
Considering this I still would not alter an image for my publication. Just because subjectivity consumes the photo from its conception does not compel me to further this process. A photojournalism code of ethics is obsolete in my opinion.
Photojournalism Ethics Guidelines
The Texarkana Gazette dead body policy is interesting. I enjoy how the industry can draw lines between what is right and wrong. I don't believe I would include photo's of dead bodies in my publication. The main question is the inherent news value of the photograph. Or is it? I appreciate the Gazette's attempt to exist within a community. We are not photographing and interviewing subjects... we are working with and for humans. It is interesting how there is causation between selling papers and printing content that appears controversial or taboo. I question our motives of death and devastation. Why show a glimpse of humanity in refusing to print photos of dead bodies... when a microphone/camera/tape recorder is easily thrust in the face of a family member who is viewing the dead body for the first?
Helter Skelter No More: An Evolving Guidebook for Online Ethics
"Are we comfortable with journalists who are not opinion columnists expressing more voice in their blogs than they can in the paper?":
That question parallels the concept that journalists cannot donate to political campaigns and the gamete conflict of interest issues. Majority of journalists are just an unknown byline. I don't believe anyone who claims to be objective and that their work reflects such objectivity. I don't know how many more times I can address this issue. I want my writers to keep a public blog. If my readers are informed of my writers opinions then the readers are better able to critically read the paper. If writers are given a medium to express their voice I feel that voice will less likely spill onto the 'news'.
"One area that's not really sorted out is the issue of what commentators can link to. Clearly porn sites are a no-no, but what about links to videos or photos of dead and wounded or politically inflammatory sites?":
If there are so many avenues were the writers voice may appear wouldn't one begin to critically debate objectivity? If a reader's understanding of a story is manipulated by a possibly suggestive link... who is at fault? I say the public school system and our societal priorities.
Online Journalism Ethics: Guidelines from the Conference
I enjoyed skimming the guidlines' FAQ. Transparency is the buzzword I am most interested in. I'm drawn to a memory of Christian Amanpour deferring questions of opinion to husband James Rubin during their lecture a couple of years ago. It is obvious that Amanpour has opinions. All writers must have opinions, especially due to their exposure to information. Why am I left guessing? I would think opinions are based at some level on an expertise or knowledge of a particular subject. Tell me what you saw and what factors influenced what you saw. Then I will ask the same of another writer on the scene. If we can intrude upon any subject why shouldn't our readers do the same to us? Why are we hiding behind the guise of objectivity?
Monday, March 16, 2009
Redesigned Newspapers Launch in Three Cities
The parallels between the redesigns presented in this article and the classic online look are difficult to ignore. I found The Oklahoman redesign to a 44-inch web really interesting. I often forget that design is more than the visual content of the paper... the material dimensions of a newspaper appear to be stagnant and The Oklahoman made a bold move. The new width of the paper yields tighter writing. This concept can easily be applied to the web. Web news has a very narrow text field, considering ad placement, and I would think web writing should tighten as well.
I also enjoyed The Oklahoman color schemes. I appreciate the concept, perhaps not the vibrant colors. As much as I dislike thinking in terms of marketing and sales... the color schemes really brand the particular paper section in the minds of the readers. It is not to demanding to read the section titles of a paper, but the color coded sections provide a certain element that I'm having difficulties describing the mechanics... it just works for me.
the Courant's vertical nameplate is really attractive. There are these seemingly simple redesign options that can complete change the feel of a paper. The added .com wrap around is novel but does look a little out of place.
This article made me reconsider the basic design of a paper. You don't need to concoct new flashy fancy designs. Think about the basic elements of design and mix it up a bit. Bold moves usually come from bending the basics not reinvention.
Next Generation of Visual Thinkers is Drawing the Future of Journalism
Visual skill is critical today. Everything today is faster than the day before. infographic skill is the mode to keep up with the speed of life. With speed is, in my mind, complexity. I am bombarded with so much text as a student. Despite my passion for reading... by the end of the day I either don't give a shit or am unable to read critically. Incorporating visuals into a news story, and more than just a complementary feature but integral to comprehending the story, reaches a new level of understanding and quicker dissemination of information.
Our final project targets the typical 20-something-year-old. Infographics are essential to reaching the non so typical news reader. Although words can stir tremendous emotion, you can't knock the power of a image.
One Image
If we want to talk objectivity, the concept of one image one word is the key. Fewer words and translation limits the possibility of the writers subjective voice bleeding through the story. If a single image says nearly all that needs to be communicated, use the single image. I think we forgot how simple a story can be packaged. A photograph or emotional headline can often relay as much information as a dissertation. Photographs still can be as subjective as the written word. Anyone pushing objectivity is pushing an agenda.
Is Web a Tab?
I'm not sure I fully understand the comparison of web news to tabloids. I am assuming the tab format is a lot of short snippets of 'information'. If that is the case, I would agree that the web is developing a tab format. The Oklahoman 44-inch design supports the tab format with tighter writing. I think this format has a place, however an issue is the tab format replacing all forms or feature and investigative reporting. The other day I was reflecting on the idea that your world can be as big as you want it to be. My world is selectively large. We live in a global economy connected by global communication. There is a lot to report on. Sometimes an AP'esque approach to breaking news works. When the market becomes saturated with brief breaking news, then yes, the web will be a tab. I am hopeful that investigative extended work will continue to be produced.
Our final project should incorporate news feed and feature writing. This is were editorial decision making comes to light. If there is communication between the reader and the editor feature stories will survive. Every story cannot be a feature. Who would read them all?
Debunking Myths
I agree that design is a major component to the success of a news story... however after reading this article, I believe designers take themselves too seriously. I have barely enough time to read the news let a lone scrutinize over the intimate, curvatiousness of rag right alignment.
Myth 6, the dollar bill test was my favorite. If there is too much gray I think you can tell without succumbing to the dollar bill test.
I'm sure many designers feel there is a science to their work... and I partially agree. However, I feel the best design just feels right, looks right. A design has to be god awfully to affect the reader to the point where they stop reading. Then again... aren't we forgetting about the content? A story must compete with a bunch of external environmental factors... I doubt the design is completely to blame.
-- I was in class friday before break -- we discussed the final blog article
The parallels between the redesigns presented in this article and the classic online look are difficult to ignore. I found The Oklahoman redesign to a 44-inch web really interesting. I often forget that design is more than the visual content of the paper... the material dimensions of a newspaper appear to be stagnant and The Oklahoman made a bold move. The new width of the paper yields tighter writing. This concept can easily be applied to the web. Web news has a very narrow text field, considering ad placement, and I would think web writing should tighten as well.
I also enjoyed The Oklahoman color schemes. I appreciate the concept, perhaps not the vibrant colors. As much as I dislike thinking in terms of marketing and sales... the color schemes really brand the particular paper section in the minds of the readers. It is not to demanding to read the section titles of a paper, but the color coded sections provide a certain element that I'm having difficulties describing the mechanics... it just works for me.
the Courant's vertical nameplate is really attractive. There are these seemingly simple redesign options that can complete change the feel of a paper. The added .com wrap around is novel but does look a little out of place.
This article made me reconsider the basic design of a paper. You don't need to concoct new flashy fancy designs. Think about the basic elements of design and mix it up a bit. Bold moves usually come from bending the basics not reinvention.
Next Generation of Visual Thinkers is Drawing the Future of Journalism
Visual skill is critical today. Everything today is faster than the day before. infographic skill is the mode to keep up with the speed of life. With speed is, in my mind, complexity. I am bombarded with so much text as a student. Despite my passion for reading... by the end of the day I either don't give a shit or am unable to read critically. Incorporating visuals into a news story, and more than just a complementary feature but integral to comprehending the story, reaches a new level of understanding and quicker dissemination of information.
Our final project targets the typical 20-something-year-old. Infographics are essential to reaching the non so typical news reader. Although words can stir tremendous emotion, you can't knock the power of a image.
One Image
If we want to talk objectivity, the concept of one image one word is the key. Fewer words and translation limits the possibility of the writers subjective voice bleeding through the story. If a single image says nearly all that needs to be communicated, use the single image. I think we forgot how simple a story can be packaged. A photograph or emotional headline can often relay as much information as a dissertation. Photographs still can be as subjective as the written word. Anyone pushing objectivity is pushing an agenda.
Is Web a Tab?
I'm not sure I fully understand the comparison of web news to tabloids. I am assuming the tab format is a lot of short snippets of 'information'. If that is the case, I would agree that the web is developing a tab format. The Oklahoman 44-inch design supports the tab format with tighter writing. I think this format has a place, however an issue is the tab format replacing all forms or feature and investigative reporting. The other day I was reflecting on the idea that your world can be as big as you want it to be. My world is selectively large. We live in a global economy connected by global communication. There is a lot to report on. Sometimes an AP'esque approach to breaking news works. When the market becomes saturated with brief breaking news, then yes, the web will be a tab. I am hopeful that investigative extended work will continue to be produced.
Our final project should incorporate news feed and feature writing. This is were editorial decision making comes to light. If there is communication between the reader and the editor feature stories will survive. Every story cannot be a feature. Who would read them all?
Debunking Myths
I agree that design is a major component to the success of a news story... however after reading this article, I believe designers take themselves too seriously. I have barely enough time to read the news let a lone scrutinize over the intimate, curvatiousness of rag right alignment.
Myth 6, the dollar bill test was my favorite. If there is too much gray I think you can tell without succumbing to the dollar bill test.
I'm sure many designers feel there is a science to their work... and I partially agree. However, I feel the best design just feels right, looks right. A design has to be god awfully to affect the reader to the point where they stop reading. Then again... aren't we forgetting about the content? A story must compete with a bunch of external environmental factors... I doubt the design is completely to blame.
-- I was in class friday before break -- we discussed the final blog article
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Presentation screen shots
At The Edge of Life:
Who decides when you die?
Bernie Madoff's Clients: The Official List
List of Madoff clients runs in thousands
Who decides when you die?
Bernie Madoff's Clients: The Official List
List of Madoff clients runs in thousands
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
The Morgue
I can't help but think the death of the newspaper is one big conspiracy headed by a group of international bankers. What better way to infect apathy and spread disinformation throughout the states than to take away the newspapers? A monstrous hoax, greater than anything Mr. Bernie Madoff could pull, has been in the works for decades. The whole situation was premeditated.
I don't know what to say to or about Joe Mathews. If I was an editor for the LA Times what would I do? Well I think I would first be reading the classifieds... But really, what would I do? I have no idea. Jump ship? Completely reinvent the paper? What can be done when there is no money? Well a lot of things -- but we are talking business here. Mathews provides me with very little in regards to my final project. Perhaps completely forget about print? Draw on the readership to help with the hole in the news that is investigative reporting... Forget about breaking news?
The Platform: The Future of News
Osnos raises a practical question, why does nytimes.com give me the news for free? I don't pay a penny for anything I obtain on the internet. The only thing I pay for involving the internet is the internet. If I had to pay a online subscription fee to nytimes.com I most likely would. My loyalty to a particular news org would be obvious.. and this loyalty is a concept I've been blogging about all along. News should be free... but it can't unless it becomes mutant appendage to the federal government.
Osnos advice: Have a monthly subscription fee for my online news project.
Imagining A City Without Its Daily Newspaper
I can't imagine without the Buffalo News. The next best thing for my neck of the woods is the Alden Advertiser... and I would be better off standing outside of the A+ on Broadway to learn what is really going on in town. The death of the city daily is reality.
Our final project does not focus on local news, so I can't respond on the application of this article.... however, that might be the very problem.
A Nonprofit Panacea For Newspapers?
A non-profit model makes sense to me. Who makes the big bucks in todays typical new model? Well no one right now.. but not the reporters or the people in the newsroom. A bigger player is making the money. I don't think reporter would take a pay cut under a non-profit model.
I've heard individuals criticize ProPublica and its endowers... but I could care less that a rich couple is solely supporting the project. Yes, a political slanted whisper can be heard throughout some of ProPublica's stories... however, I've given up on objectivity along time ago. The stories I see on ProPublica I haven't seen anywhere else.
My first step for my own news site would be to write a letter to all the rich people I know. If that is a no go... I would honestly try the non-profit route. Why a non-profit? Why not. Non-profits are apart of the community. People want to know that their money is going directly to the source. People like knowing that their $25 donation supported the article that uncovered asbestos in the local elementary school.
I can't help but think the death of the newspaper is one big conspiracy headed by a group of international bankers. What better way to infect apathy and spread disinformation throughout the states than to take away the newspapers? A monstrous hoax, greater than anything Mr. Bernie Madoff could pull, has been in the works for decades. The whole situation was premeditated.
I don't know what to say to or about Joe Mathews. If I was an editor for the LA Times what would I do? Well I think I would first be reading the classifieds... But really, what would I do? I have no idea. Jump ship? Completely reinvent the paper? What can be done when there is no money? Well a lot of things -- but we are talking business here. Mathews provides me with very little in regards to my final project. Perhaps completely forget about print? Draw on the readership to help with the hole in the news that is investigative reporting... Forget about breaking news?
The Platform: The Future of News
Osnos raises a practical question, why does nytimes.com give me the news for free? I don't pay a penny for anything I obtain on the internet. The only thing I pay for involving the internet is the internet. If I had to pay a online subscription fee to nytimes.com I most likely would. My loyalty to a particular news org would be obvious.. and this loyalty is a concept I've been blogging about all along. News should be free... but it can't unless it becomes mutant appendage to the federal government.
Osnos advice: Have a monthly subscription fee for my online news project.
Imagining A City Without Its Daily Newspaper
I can't imagine without the Buffalo News. The next best thing for my neck of the woods is the Alden Advertiser... and I would be better off standing outside of the A+ on Broadway to learn what is really going on in town. The death of the city daily is reality.
Our final project does not focus on local news, so I can't respond on the application of this article.... however, that might be the very problem.
A Nonprofit Panacea For Newspapers?
A non-profit model makes sense to me. Who makes the big bucks in todays typical new model? Well no one right now.. but not the reporters or the people in the newsroom. A bigger player is making the money. I don't think reporter would take a pay cut under a non-profit model.
I've heard individuals criticize ProPublica and its endowers... but I could care less that a rich couple is solely supporting the project. Yes, a political slanted whisper can be heard throughout some of ProPublica's stories... however, I've given up on objectivity along time ago. The stories I see on ProPublica I haven't seen anywhere else.
My first step for my own news site would be to write a letter to all the rich people I know. If that is a no go... I would honestly try the non-profit route. Why a non-profit? Why not. Non-profits are apart of the community. People want to know that their money is going directly to the source. People like knowing that their $25 donation supported the article that uncovered asbestos in the local elementary school.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Spot.us
I checked out David Cohn's community funded reporting site... and I am intrigued. The concept makes sense, remove the advertisers and The Man from the equation. The stories that are fully funded and viewable on the site are unique. As a reader there is something very powerful about being in control of content. The community funded approach is beyond nytimes.com logging my click stream and known what stories I want to read... if controlling the creation of a story was not desirous... do you think that Hearst and Pulitzer would have been in the business? I was mostly interested in how the writers come up with their target price tag. Hell, I'd let people click their little fingers away until the donate bar exploded. I'm being facetious. Props to Cohn. The digital age is all about innovation. After reading blog after blog about how scary and earth-shattering the switch to digital, I lose sympathy. There are other ways to succeed... I can't say that I know how to right now, but I am confident that the future isn't as gloomy as the business makes it out it be.
As an editor I feel that your sites business model must be like Cohn's. I'm not sure how successful this microphilantrophy would work if it were to compliment traditional advertising funded news.
I'm a bit unresponsive to the link/newswire article. I think I'm done with the linking idea.
I think it is a sign of hope that participants in the anthropology surveys discussed in Jim Kennedy's article are wanting stories with depth. I feel like whoever the man is in charge would prefer my generation to be content with snippets of news... just enough to get by in conversation. The 1-2-3 model makes sense... make a single story accessible via differ modes of consumption. I have such a difficult time understanding the newsrooms qualms. I think of myself mildly informed; I certainly could and should be more informed but that is a result of my own laziness. I don't find myself text links on my phone, I've never send a news video on my phone, and the day I start this whole twitter business is the day I am forced to. Is it completely necessary to adopt a journalism model to compliment the new modes of information communication? As an editor, the one case that I would see myself developing is the realm of podcast. I will make a generalization... but I think it is safe to say that a majority of Americans have some sort of mp3 player. If as a reader, I had a loyalty to a certain news site I would most certainly appreciate the mornings news reported via a podcast in the distinct news style that draws my loyalty to the news org. I guess I am as reluctant as the 55-year-old cigarette smoking editor that is perfectly content with an inkjet printer.
I am laughing to myself because I just opened the last article for this week's blogs and I believe the last sentence I wrote was about James P. Gannon.
I think an interesting business model would be to incorporate Gannon's one-man show with the microphilanthropic concept. Gannon expressed the difficulties in maintaining RappVoice alone. However, a downside.. Gannon said he had few individuals in the community willing to write for his publication. I think this model would best suit an urban setting or a larger community. Community funded reporting can be supplemented with daily news written by a small (1-2) writing staff. The issue always comes back to revenue. Ideally, I would have a community funded reporting model and a small fraction of the donation would contribute to maintaining the site (and pay my bills). Original daily reporting would also take place and the revenue from local advertisements would again mostly support the editor. I am not completely sure how linking revenue works... but the site could also link to larger local papers.
I checked out David Cohn's community funded reporting site... and I am intrigued. The concept makes sense, remove the advertisers and The Man from the equation. The stories that are fully funded and viewable on the site are unique. As a reader there is something very powerful about being in control of content. The community funded approach is beyond nytimes.com logging my click stream and known what stories I want to read... if controlling the creation of a story was not desirous... do you think that Hearst and Pulitzer would have been in the business? I was mostly interested in how the writers come up with their target price tag. Hell, I'd let people click their little fingers away until the donate bar exploded. I'm being facetious. Props to Cohn. The digital age is all about innovation. After reading blog after blog about how scary and earth-shattering the switch to digital, I lose sympathy. There are other ways to succeed... I can't say that I know how to right now, but I am confident that the future isn't as gloomy as the business makes it out it be.
As an editor I feel that your sites business model must be like Cohn's. I'm not sure how successful this microphilantrophy would work if it were to compliment traditional advertising funded news.
I'm a bit unresponsive to the link/newswire article. I think I'm done with the linking idea.
I think it is a sign of hope that participants in the anthropology surveys discussed in Jim Kennedy's article are wanting stories with depth. I feel like whoever the man is in charge would prefer my generation to be content with snippets of news... just enough to get by in conversation. The 1-2-3 model makes sense... make a single story accessible via differ modes of consumption. I have such a difficult time understanding the newsrooms qualms. I think of myself mildly informed; I certainly could and should be more informed but that is a result of my own laziness. I don't find myself text links on my phone, I've never send a news video on my phone, and the day I start this whole twitter business is the day I am forced to. Is it completely necessary to adopt a journalism model to compliment the new modes of information communication? As an editor, the one case that I would see myself developing is the realm of podcast. I will make a generalization... but I think it is safe to say that a majority of Americans have some sort of mp3 player. If as a reader, I had a loyalty to a certain news site I would most certainly appreciate the mornings news reported via a podcast in the distinct news style that draws my loyalty to the news org. I guess I am as reluctant as the 55-year-old cigarette smoking editor that is perfectly content with an inkjet printer.
I am laughing to myself because I just opened the last article for this week's blogs and I believe the last sentence I wrote was about James P. Gannon.
I think an interesting business model would be to incorporate Gannon's one-man show with the microphilanthropic concept. Gannon expressed the difficulties in maintaining RappVoice alone. However, a downside.. Gannon said he had few individuals in the community willing to write for his publication. I think this model would best suit an urban setting or a larger community. Community funded reporting can be supplemented with daily news written by a small (1-2) writing staff. The issue always comes back to revenue. Ideally, I would have a community funded reporting model and a small fraction of the donation would contribute to maintaining the site (and pay my bills). Original daily reporting would also take place and the revenue from local advertisements would again mostly support the editor. I am not completely sure how linking revenue works... but the site could also link to larger local papers.
Presentation
News without deadlines
Palliative Care: when enough is enough
Investigations: At The Edge Of Life : Dallas Morning News
- Emphasis on videos
- when is enough enough
a. family's willingness to let go
- Conversation with video editor Sonya N. Hebert
a. sensationalized?
b. willingness of participants
c. humanity
Who decides when you die? : The Boston Globe
Breaking News: Bernie Madoff Ponzi Scheme
Bernie Madoff's Clients: The Official List : The Business Insider
- Slideshow
List of Madoff clients runs in thousands : cnn.money.com
Palliative Care: when enough is enough
Investigations: At The Edge Of Life : Dallas Morning News
- Emphasis on videos
- when is enough enough
a. family's willingness to let go
- Conversation with video editor Sonya N. Hebert
a. sensationalized?
b. willingness of participants
c. humanity
Who decides when you die? : The Boston Globe
Breaking News: Bernie Madoff Ponzi Scheme
Bernie Madoff's Clients: The Official List : The Business Insider
- Slideshow
List of Madoff clients runs in thousands : cnn.money.com
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
‘I’m not an inventor. I’m an improver. I see things that are wrong, and I improve them. And this is broken.’
Crowdsourcing
After reading Jeff Howe's article, I am left with the question: what is the difference between a freelance journalist and a 'crowdsourcing'/citizen journalist? More simply, who is considered a journalist? Does declaring a job title as journalist make a journalist? I don't like this divide between real journalists and readers who write articles. A BA from Ithaca College certainly does not make me feel like a journalists.
However, I find myself thinking hypocritically... because I agree, on the surface, that crowdsourcing websites are complimentary not competition to traditional news organizations. Maybe I don't really believe that, perhaps it is an idea I feel I should believe.
It makes a lot of financial sense to engage the readers in contributing. If anything, having a 'contributor' in regions that money limits stationing 'real journalists' provides infinite story tips that never would be heard.
I'm still hung up on my thoughts on real journalists... I think I need to sit on it for a bit, perhaps I will get back to it later in this entry.
The Blogging Journalist
As an editor, I would encourage my writers to blog. One concept that I've stressed in my entries is to create some sort of loyalty between the writer and the readers, not particularly between the writer and the news org. Blogging will allow this to happen. I agree with Paul Bradshaw, journalists can receive great leads from their readers via blog. Writers should be thinking of the readers when writing, and not just in terms of marketing but a genuine concern for the readers best interest.
page-view whores
Does it really matter who breaks the story first, when the 'competition' is just seconds behind? Everything is at high-speed these days that it doesn't seem to matter anymore. As Bob Steele points out, twitters and high connectivity can create major ethical dilemmas and situations where few news orgs could pass an actual malice test. Where is the quality and thoroughness? I guess I see myself as more of a feature writer and am just having a difficult time understanding the need to twitter information at a child's funeral.
I am not as tech savvy as I once was... however I would encourage my writers to use the new tools of today. I think the issue is that journalists who are raised by these new tools will fail in the courts eyes in using standard journalistic practices. I don't think you can attribute crucial facts of a story to someone who commented on your blog. But this issue was addressed in cases like Curtis v Butts, just without the blogs and tweets. Source credibility always has been important... it shouldn't change to do the digital age.
Do what you do best. Link to the rest
So I checked out the BusinessWeek Business Exchange... and I liked it. There was an obvious separation between the magazine website and the Exchange community. The fact that a news org simultaneously produces a news site and a community Exchange is impressive. Money is the key, and even if readers are spending more time on the exchange and leaving BusinessWeek, BusinessWeek still makes money from outsourcing... I'm actually kind of confused as to how the exchange makes money. There is one large banner ad and then a small box of Google ads. I guess the idea is to keep BusinessWeek fresh in the readers mind and hopefully become the readers first stop. As I multitask, blog and sniff around the Exchange, I am more and more impressed with the Exchange. Keep the traditional news site and compliment the site with a community of links. The transparency in no preference between the sources of links is great. My loyalty to BusinessWeek is enhanced by the news orgs willingness to redirect me.
I was looking at a highly active users profile and was directed to an article on Bentley University's newspaper... the site has a 'double-click any word' feature that is pretty impressive. A pop up shows what answers.com has to say about the word or key phrase then you can look at what wikipedia has to say about the word. The best thing is it is all done in a pop up and you never leave the original article.
The main idea I will walk away with from this week's readings is the complimentary BusinessWeek Exchange. Why completely revamp the way the news is generated? simply compliment the news. I think this is a safe move. Safe is good for now, but I hope BusinessWeek is still brainstorming.
After reading Jeff Howe's article, I am left with the question: what is the difference between a freelance journalist and a 'crowdsourcing'/citizen journalist? More simply, who is considered a journalist? Does declaring a job title as journalist make a journalist? I don't like this divide between real journalists and readers who write articles. A BA from Ithaca College certainly does not make me feel like a journalists.
However, I find myself thinking hypocritically... because I agree, on the surface, that crowdsourcing websites are complimentary not competition to traditional news organizations. Maybe I don't really believe that, perhaps it is an idea I feel I should believe.
It makes a lot of financial sense to engage the readers in contributing. If anything, having a 'contributor' in regions that money limits stationing 'real journalists' provides infinite story tips that never would be heard.
I'm still hung up on my thoughts on real journalists... I think I need to sit on it for a bit, perhaps I will get back to it later in this entry.
The Blogging Journalist
As an editor, I would encourage my writers to blog. One concept that I've stressed in my entries is to create some sort of loyalty between the writer and the readers, not particularly between the writer and the news org. Blogging will allow this to happen. I agree with Paul Bradshaw, journalists can receive great leads from their readers via blog. Writers should be thinking of the readers when writing, and not just in terms of marketing but a genuine concern for the readers best interest.
page-view whores
Does it really matter who breaks the story first, when the 'competition' is just seconds behind? Everything is at high-speed these days that it doesn't seem to matter anymore. As Bob Steele points out, twitters and high connectivity can create major ethical dilemmas and situations where few news orgs could pass an actual malice test. Where is the quality and thoroughness? I guess I see myself as more of a feature writer and am just having a difficult time understanding the need to twitter information at a child's funeral.
I am not as tech savvy as I once was... however I would encourage my writers to use the new tools of today. I think the issue is that journalists who are raised by these new tools will fail in the courts eyes in using standard journalistic practices. I don't think you can attribute crucial facts of a story to someone who commented on your blog. But this issue was addressed in cases like Curtis v Butts, just without the blogs and tweets. Source credibility always has been important... it shouldn't change to do the digital age.
Do what you do best. Link to the rest
So I checked out the BusinessWeek Business Exchange... and I liked it. There was an obvious separation between the magazine website and the Exchange community. The fact that a news org simultaneously produces a news site and a community Exchange is impressive. Money is the key, and even if readers are spending more time on the exchange and leaving BusinessWeek, BusinessWeek still makes money from outsourcing... I'm actually kind of confused as to how the exchange makes money. There is one large banner ad and then a small box of Google ads. I guess the idea is to keep BusinessWeek fresh in the readers mind and hopefully become the readers first stop. As I multitask, blog and sniff around the Exchange, I am more and more impressed with the Exchange. Keep the traditional news site and compliment the site with a community of links. The transparency in no preference between the sources of links is great. My loyalty to BusinessWeek is enhanced by the news orgs willingness to redirect me.
I was looking at a highly active users profile and was directed to an article on Bentley University's newspaper... the site has a 'double-click any word' feature that is pretty impressive. A pop up shows what answers.com has to say about the word or key phrase then you can look at what wikipedia has to say about the word. The best thing is it is all done in a pop up and you never leave the original article.
The main idea I will walk away with from this week's readings is the complimentary BusinessWeek Exchange. Why completely revamp the way the news is generated? simply compliment the news. I think this is a safe move. Safe is good for now, but I hope BusinessWeek is still brainstorming.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Slow down. You're moving too fast.
Maggie Jackson and David Nicholas discuss a societal issue where the 'future of journalism' seems a superficial concept to dissect. The times they are a changin'. Honestly I don't care if the news world can 'keep up' with the digital explosion of: information now and information quick. Journalists should not act like third world nations whose drive is to catch up to imperialistic superpowers. Journalists need to take a stand. My generation is on the fringe of lacking substance... I deeply fear for the younger generation who knows no other world than the high-speed wireless. The question is never raised as to whether this is ok.... is it ok that our society is a bunch of robots who don't even know how to breathe anymore? Is it ok that there is no depth to our knowledge? Is it ok that in order to catch and keep ones attention there must be flashing lights, interaction, and bells and whistles?
No.
Ok, the behavior of Internet users is flirty and quick. Must it remain this way? This probably sounds idealistic... but online news MUST detach itself from the typical business models that drive the schizophrenic hysteria of the today's news room. Perhaps it is the fundamental tradition of journalism that is the problem. Finally people have an opportunity for alternative outlets and sources... and people are eating it up, however fragmented as it may be.
I don't want more choice. I don't want more. I want someone to help simplify my life. Let all the corporate news outlets duke it out providing more and more until they crash the network... Provide quality writing. Write the stories they aren't writing about. Keep it real. Keep it manageable.
I'm a but confused as to what Persephone Miel concluded about the Media Re:public think tank, and the conversion he/she made. The one conclusion that did stick out was:
"Despite impressive successes, participation in the online media space is not universal; there are populations and ideas that remain underrepresented."
Is everyone online? What is the majority of topic content online? John Kelly's blogosphere seems to say that online information focus is politics and technology. I read an article in this weeks Nation discussing how no one reads anymore. Libraries are closing all over the nation, because budgets cannot keep them open. Libraries are one of the few locations that provide free Internet access. How many people are actually reading online news/blogs? Are traditional news outlets shrinking in circulation because of the digital age... or are people just not reading the news? When I am home, I still enjoy reading The Buffalo News on Sunday morning while sipping my Tim Horton's coffee and eating timbits, while my mother reads the classifieds. I will continue to indulge in this activity as long as the paper shows up in my mailbox. When I read printed news I read whatever is presented to me. When I read news online I typically read the headlines of nytimes.com homepage or am looking for a particular topic. This concept was discussed in last week's blog articles, but I think is still relevant this week. Are people reading the news? and who is reading the news?
The entire digital scare is out of hand. Participatory news is new. If any ass hole can post his thoughts online, he will do it (just look at me). Blogs right-hand man is conspiracy. Conspiracy is attractive.
A comment in one of the the articles stated that traditional news people are concerned about what is going to happen to their jobs. If you can't beat them, join them. Start your own site. Use the professional skills you acquired in traditional news and produce your know credible articles. Seems simple to me.
Blogs are the latest livejournal, and livejournal was quickly passe and so will blogs.
After this week's readings I conclude:
1. Write quality news
2. Let the corporate man deal with hard news
3. Online should be a realm of investigative pieces, or news the agenda setters are not talking about (which is infinite and more important... lets talk about femicide and the hoax that is the federal reserve... the stuff that The Man won't print because it comes back to advertisers and perhaps the few rich and power families that control this planet)
4. It is all about the topic in the digital world.
No.
Ok, the behavior of Internet users is flirty and quick. Must it remain this way? This probably sounds idealistic... but online news MUST detach itself from the typical business models that drive the schizophrenic hysteria of the today's news room. Perhaps it is the fundamental tradition of journalism that is the problem. Finally people have an opportunity for alternative outlets and sources... and people are eating it up, however fragmented as it may be.
I don't want more choice. I don't want more. I want someone to help simplify my life. Let all the corporate news outlets duke it out providing more and more until they crash the network... Provide quality writing. Write the stories they aren't writing about. Keep it real. Keep it manageable.
I'm a but confused as to what Persephone Miel concluded about the Media Re:public think tank, and the conversion he/she made. The one conclusion that did stick out was:
"Despite impressive successes, participation in the online media space is not universal; there are populations and ideas that remain underrepresented."
Is everyone online? What is the majority of topic content online? John Kelly's blogosphere seems to say that online information focus is politics and technology. I read an article in this weeks Nation discussing how no one reads anymore. Libraries are closing all over the nation, because budgets cannot keep them open. Libraries are one of the few locations that provide free Internet access. How many people are actually reading online news/blogs? Are traditional news outlets shrinking in circulation because of the digital age... or are people just not reading the news? When I am home, I still enjoy reading The Buffalo News on Sunday morning while sipping my Tim Horton's coffee and eating timbits, while my mother reads the classifieds. I will continue to indulge in this activity as long as the paper shows up in my mailbox. When I read printed news I read whatever is presented to me. When I read news online I typically read the headlines of nytimes.com homepage or am looking for a particular topic. This concept was discussed in last week's blog articles, but I think is still relevant this week. Are people reading the news? and who is reading the news?
The entire digital scare is out of hand. Participatory news is new. If any ass hole can post his thoughts online, he will do it (just look at me). Blogs right-hand man is conspiracy. Conspiracy is attractive.
A comment in one of the the articles stated that traditional news people are concerned about what is going to happen to their jobs. If you can't beat them, join them. Start your own site. Use the professional skills you acquired in traditional news and produce your know credible articles. Seems simple to me.
Blogs are the latest livejournal, and livejournal was quickly passe and so will blogs.
After this week's readings I conclude:
1. Write quality news
2. Let the corporate man deal with hard news
3. Online should be a realm of investigative pieces, or news the agenda setters are not talking about (which is infinite and more important... lets talk about femicide and the hoax that is the federal reserve... the stuff that The Man won't print because it comes back to advertisers and perhaps the few rich and power families that control this planet)
4. It is all about the topic in the digital world.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Objective Journalism: A contradiction of terms
Psychologist Barry Schwartz points out an issue that plagues my day-to-day activities. Overwhelming choice. I try to simplify my life. Simplicity often leads to routine... but I am ok with that. So the question is... how do we present stories deep within our ever growing library of online newspaper pages?
Ethan Zuckerman discussed how editors often place below the fold an article that a reader might never get to or overlook. The New York Times online tries this, and presents scores of links at the bottom on the homepage. I frequent these novelty links. My issue is, yes I would like to be presented diverse, multicultural and 'serendipitous' options for news coverage... but I don't have the time to look for it.. and I also do not want an individual with a bias to highlight what I should look at.
We have the technology to generate story links via artificial intelligence. I suggest we provide our readers with links randomly with AI. Each time you refresh the page a handful of unique story headlines and links will also refresh. There should be no rhyme or reason... every story from that day or weekly edition is fair game in this random selection.
I think a unique approach is to create a website that performs this generation with hundreds of newspapers... not limiting yourself to a news source that already has a skewed opinion. But... I'm sure this already exists.
Robert Niles' article gave me hope. It is nice to know that their are others out there who understand the contradiction in objective journalism. There are these things called New Journalism and Gonzo Journalism, where I seek refuge. If these alternative approaches to news exist... why am I not supported in writing this way for class? I've mentioned before that blogging is this entity that I wish to separate from journalism. I don't read blogs much... there is something dangerous about it in my mind... maybe I know what my intentions would be if I kept a blog... However I often read the nytimes.com blog on aging. The author makes the subject human again.. she does peddle her interest, however she often says so. What is wrong with writing a news story about my experience and involvement if I say... 'this is what I did and this is what I saw'?
Online news should invest in readers loyalty to the individual writer. The writer should be knowledgeable in the topic field and bias' and opinions should preface the article. If the reader is turned off after reading the preface or writer's bio... so be it.. I'm sure there are two more people to that one who is interested. Have faith in your writers perspective. If this is too suggestive of homogeneous approach to news.... have two writers with different, not necessarily contrasting, viewpoints tackle the same issue. We need in invest, monetarily, in, not the big picture, more than one picture.
Content and community... I really can't elaborate more on Luke Morris' article. I believe my concept on writer loyalty stems from the concept of the two C's. I am not the most hi tech person either so suggesting ways of entering newer new media is beyond me... Twitter is just a buzz word to me... but I guess that gives me reason to explore.
Yes, today's youth express trust issues with mainstream media.. however I think the bigger issue concerning media literacy is the fact that news is new. How can I follow the news if I don't know how we got to this point in time. Mainstream news, specifically TV news speaks to us as if we are kids... however still expect too much in regard to history and context. Perhaps this issue concerns the public school systems more than the media... but the media has more freedom in provoking change. A way to 'save' print is to utilize the web as a means to supply history. I genuinely believe youth readership would increase if that cohort knew what we were talking about. How many 65-year-olds pick up windsurfing on the first try (besides my great-uncle Albert)? Not many. You can't just shove someone into a situation where the foundation is rooted in the past.
Ethan Zuckerman discussed how editors often place below the fold an article that a reader might never get to or overlook. The New York Times online tries this, and presents scores of links at the bottom on the homepage. I frequent these novelty links. My issue is, yes I would like to be presented diverse, multicultural and 'serendipitous' options for news coverage... but I don't have the time to look for it.. and I also do not want an individual with a bias to highlight what I should look at.
We have the technology to generate story links via artificial intelligence. I suggest we provide our readers with links randomly with AI. Each time you refresh the page a handful of unique story headlines and links will also refresh. There should be no rhyme or reason... every story from that day or weekly edition is fair game in this random selection.
I think a unique approach is to create a website that performs this generation with hundreds of newspapers... not limiting yourself to a news source that already has a skewed opinion. But... I'm sure this already exists.
Robert Niles' article gave me hope. It is nice to know that their are others out there who understand the contradiction in objective journalism. There are these things called New Journalism and Gonzo Journalism, where I seek refuge. If these alternative approaches to news exist... why am I not supported in writing this way for class? I've mentioned before that blogging is this entity that I wish to separate from journalism. I don't read blogs much... there is something dangerous about it in my mind... maybe I know what my intentions would be if I kept a blog... However I often read the nytimes.com blog on aging. The author makes the subject human again.. she does peddle her interest, however she often says so. What is wrong with writing a news story about my experience and involvement if I say... 'this is what I did and this is what I saw'?
Online news should invest in readers loyalty to the individual writer. The writer should be knowledgeable in the topic field and bias' and opinions should preface the article. If the reader is turned off after reading the preface or writer's bio... so be it.. I'm sure there are two more people to that one who is interested. Have faith in your writers perspective. If this is too suggestive of homogeneous approach to news.... have two writers with different, not necessarily contrasting, viewpoints tackle the same issue. We need in invest, monetarily, in, not the big picture, more than one picture.
Content and community... I really can't elaborate more on Luke Morris' article. I believe my concept on writer loyalty stems from the concept of the two C's. I am not the most hi tech person either so suggesting ways of entering newer new media is beyond me... Twitter is just a buzz word to me... but I guess that gives me reason to explore.
Yes, today's youth express trust issues with mainstream media.. however I think the bigger issue concerning media literacy is the fact that news is new. How can I follow the news if I don't know how we got to this point in time. Mainstream news, specifically TV news speaks to us as if we are kids... however still expect too much in regard to history and context. Perhaps this issue concerns the public school systems more than the media... but the media has more freedom in provoking change. A way to 'save' print is to utilize the web as a means to supply history. I genuinely believe youth readership would increase if that cohort knew what we were talking about. How many 65-year-olds pick up windsurfing on the first try (besides my great-uncle Albert)? Not many. You can't just shove someone into a situation where the foundation is rooted in the past.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Online news
an entrepreneurial mindset
A journalist must find a niche and keep it local. I hesitate in using the word journalist. Traditional news mediums are beyond civil disobedience... the digital age is here, and here to stay. Journalists of the past were forced to work with middlemen... or basically just the man to get the message out. With online news... the site creator is the boss... and the boss could be me. Perhaps we can leave 'breaking' 'hard' news to the big guys who have dealt with that news for decades (it would be a nice gesture to corporate America -- who appears to be squirming like a four-year-old who hopes not to shit themselves).... specialty, topic specific online publications is the key... and lucky for the class of 2010 their are more keys left than what dangles on the janitors lanyard. Know your reader. That isn't new. Considering the logarithmic technology embedded in google... it makes it easier to know your reader. We can know what they read and the readers clicking patterns... we can use this information to highlight new stories that the reader feels were written just for them. I'd rather know personally who my readers are and communicate directly with them. The main point I stress is to know your topic and not stray too far away.
Secondly, break it down. Provide within your site your own wiki'esque encyclopedia. Terms, events, people, ect. should be explained. This may seem to contradict my above statement of straying too far away... but time lines, event descriptions and explanations do not need to be presented within the story... provide the reader an opportunity within your site to research the background. I want the facts and news fast... but aslo, an easily accessible and easy to understand destination to fill me in on how we got to today's news.
How do we make money when web ads are pennies to a click... I'll have to think more about that.
I prefer a gonzo approach to writing... gonzo is not blogging, however. I don' t mind a subjective article.. as HST said, objective journalism is a contradiction of terms. There are so many staff reporters in a newsroom that I have no relationship with the writer. We want loyalty to the site as a whole.. but I think this can be obtained by creating a following for an individual writer. I want to know exactly what Laura saw, where she was, who she was surrounded by... what was her perspective... not necessarily her opinion. I remember Hunter writing once about sports writers picking up a collection of morning papers and compiling a story based off of everyone else's work. I'd prefer a mild subjective view to a makeshift view.
A journalist must find a niche and keep it local. I hesitate in using the word journalist. Traditional news mediums are beyond civil disobedience... the digital age is here, and here to stay. Journalists of the past were forced to work with middlemen... or basically just the man to get the message out. With online news... the site creator is the boss... and the boss could be me. Perhaps we can leave 'breaking' 'hard' news to the big guys who have dealt with that news for decades (it would be a nice gesture to corporate America -- who appears to be squirming like a four-year-old who hopes not to shit themselves).... specialty, topic specific online publications is the key... and lucky for the class of 2010 their are more keys left than what dangles on the janitors lanyard. Know your reader. That isn't new. Considering the logarithmic technology embedded in google... it makes it easier to know your reader. We can know what they read and the readers clicking patterns... we can use this information to highlight new stories that the reader feels were written just for them. I'd rather know personally who my readers are and communicate directly with them. The main point I stress is to know your topic and not stray too far away.
Secondly, break it down. Provide within your site your own wiki'esque encyclopedia. Terms, events, people, ect. should be explained. This may seem to contradict my above statement of straying too far away... but time lines, event descriptions and explanations do not need to be presented within the story... provide the reader an opportunity within your site to research the background. I want the facts and news fast... but aslo, an easily accessible and easy to understand destination to fill me in on how we got to today's news.
How do we make money when web ads are pennies to a click... I'll have to think more about that.
I prefer a gonzo approach to writing... gonzo is not blogging, however. I don' t mind a subjective article.. as HST said, objective journalism is a contradiction of terms. There are so many staff reporters in a newsroom that I have no relationship with the writer. We want loyalty to the site as a whole.. but I think this can be obtained by creating a following for an individual writer. I want to know exactly what Laura saw, where she was, who she was surrounded by... what was her perspective... not necessarily her opinion. I remember Hunter writing once about sports writers picking up a collection of morning papers and compiling a story based off of everyone else's work. I'd prefer a mild subjective view to a makeshift view.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Copy Editing
On Copy Editing
"And we are the defenders of proper grammar, usage, spelling and what publications call style..."
I understand how the title news editing can cause one to sulk in their chair... however I'm excited.. well I won't go that far: I am interested. I have received, honestly, zero teaching in grammar, picking little things up along the way... and learning more by pattern than structural knowledge. So I am excited to learn. I was a bit discouraged that the grammar skills I would be taught were in a 'news editing' environment. The above quote is unsettling to me at first... but I am being to use a bit of perspective. My trouble is that, in my mind, their is no style in newspaper writing. I cannot explain the internal struggle I have had with inverted pyramid and standard column form. However, I am beginning to separate the highly emotional and personal... Gonzo... approach that I take (which their is a home for.. but I am beginning to realize maybe not the front page of the Times.)... with news writing.
Slot Man
I don't have much to say about the Slot Man... however the image of the copy editors working, heads down.. is.. I don't want to say disturbing... but is exactly the environment I do not want to be in. I am a writer, not a news journalist. But I will take what I learn from the news and apply it how I see fit.
How Can I Become a Copy Editor?
My journalism resume was more promising before I entered the Park J-program than when entering my third year of studies. I don't want to commit my life to the Ithacan. I don't. I have a year and a half to come up with something to present to AARP to fulfill my J-internship. I don't want to write breaking news. I want to write about old people. Despite my limited portfolio... my Aging Studies resume is pack... If my hopefully employer understands that I am committed to Aging and am trained in Journalism... I don't feel completely helpless... and I do have a year and a half to make some necessary changes.
The Lot of Journalism's Noble Misfits
Sometimes I think you don't need to be a good writer to work for a paper. The blame seems to be lost along the long chain of editing. I don't have much more to say.. other than I respect the work of copy editors. They know more than I do. I know how to observe.. I can grab a nice quote here and there... I can write what I see.. But I can't tell you if it is written incorrectly. I know this class may be a bit of a struggle for me.. but it involves everything I want to learn. News Editing should be stressed at the beginning of the department curriculum.
"And we are the defenders of proper grammar, usage, spelling and what publications call style..."
I understand how the title news editing can cause one to sulk in their chair... however I'm excited.. well I won't go that far: I am interested. I have received, honestly, zero teaching in grammar, picking little things up along the way... and learning more by pattern than structural knowledge. So I am excited to learn. I was a bit discouraged that the grammar skills I would be taught were in a 'news editing' environment. The above quote is unsettling to me at first... but I am being to use a bit of perspective. My trouble is that, in my mind, their is no style in newspaper writing. I cannot explain the internal struggle I have had with inverted pyramid and standard column form. However, I am beginning to separate the highly emotional and personal... Gonzo... approach that I take (which their is a home for.. but I am beginning to realize maybe not the front page of the Times.)... with news writing.
Slot Man
I don't have much to say about the Slot Man... however the image of the copy editors working, heads down.. is.. I don't want to say disturbing... but is exactly the environment I do not want to be in. I am a writer, not a news journalist. But I will take what I learn from the news and apply it how I see fit.
How Can I Become a Copy Editor?
My journalism resume was more promising before I entered the Park J-program than when entering my third year of studies. I don't want to commit my life to the Ithacan. I don't. I have a year and a half to come up with something to present to AARP to fulfill my J-internship. I don't want to write breaking news. I want to write about old people. Despite my limited portfolio... my Aging Studies resume is pack... If my hopefully employer understands that I am committed to Aging and am trained in Journalism... I don't feel completely helpless... and I do have a year and a half to make some necessary changes.
The Lot of Journalism's Noble Misfits
Sometimes I think you don't need to be a good writer to work for a paper. The blame seems to be lost along the long chain of editing. I don't have much more to say.. other than I respect the work of copy editors. They know more than I do. I know how to observe.. I can grab a nice quote here and there... I can write what I see.. But I can't tell you if it is written incorrectly. I know this class may be a bit of a struggle for me.. but it involves everything I want to learn. News Editing should be stressed at the beginning of the department curriculum.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)