Just as I had been saying all along, a news website needs to have an interesting picture that is part of a subcategory title (line Home, Sports, Living). It needs to have a top stories section and be easy to navigate.
The only problem I find with this site is that the words and sections have ALOT of white space in between them. It makes the site look unprofessional. Also, there are not enough pictures.
Finally, where are the videos? And that search bar is way to hard to find!
_____________________________________________
Return to Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage
]]>The only problem with this website is that the news almost strictly about Harvard. Therefore, I have no real need to read the articles unless I'm doing a study on gender issues or an article about the value of online classes.
This website, though, is structured cleanly. There are several relevant and captivating pictures that draw you into the article. You look at the pictures and say: Oh! What's that? The one probem I have with this website is that it doesn't really have articles seperated according to topic (home, sports). They do have a box on the right that has Tags. That's something at the least.
But, since it is a college newspaper, they probably are more concerned about campus happenings than including all the sub heading of what the general public might be interested in. As we all know, Harvard isn't too concerned about the general public (said with their noses in the air).
________________________________________
Return to Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage
Online News Criticism By Me (to be updated).
]]>
If you really want to get into recycling, check out Recycle City. It's sooo cute and interactive! Bound to turn your kid into a recycling wizard!
Also, I'm planning a recycling project on campus for February 2, 2009. Bring your newspapers to Maura Solarium this day and help save the planet and provide bedding for a cute little animal! Check my Facebook event page or the Paper for Pets blog page for updates.
___________________________________________________________________
Return to Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage
]]>
Take for instance Wikipedia. When I search "reformation," a list comes up with several different refernces to reformation. If I click on "Protestant Reformation" I get an article so full of linkable text that I'm overwhelmed, especially when looking up this word for the first time. I don't know what information is pertinent to know about "reformation" and so I do not know what links to click on. Because there are sooo many that one could not reasonably be expected to click throught them all. If I click on one link, it will lead me to a page with even more links. It's a never ending cycle.
On a newspaper website, links should be kept minimal and straight to the point.
]]>Take for instance wired.com's "Where the Botched Children’s Book Adaptations Are." The website lists several titles of children's books that were turned into movies. The title itself is the link to the movies homepage. If you already know what movie the article is talking about, then you don't need to click on the link. See! It's straight and to the point.
When: February 2, 2010
Time: 8 a.m. to 9 p.m.
Where: Maura Solarium @ Seton Hill Univeristy in Greenburg, PA
Description:
Bring a stack of newspapers to the designated location on February 2, 2010. That's it! Just drop them off and you will be helping hundreds of pets at local shelters!
If you wish to help out further, here are some ways you can do that:
1. I will need people to help get the word out. So invite all your friends to come to this page and watch for updates.
2. Save up a big stack of newspapers and bring them to the event.
3. Volunteer to help out at the event. All this would entail is standing at the collection site and thanking people for bringing their newspapers.
This is my Honors Capstone project, and will not actually take place until the Spring 2010 semester.
So leave a comment and let me know how you can help. I want to make this event worthwhile, not just for the project's sake, but for all the cute little animals we will be helping!
When I visited The New York Times website, the first thing I did was scroll down the page, saw a jumble of words, got a headache, and exited out of the window.
Maybe it's just me, but the page seemed to have no organization to it. And WAY TOO MANY WORDS!
GOOD News Website: The Tribune Review
The Tribune Review website uses video and pictures to convey a news story and draw interest. It doesn't boggle the eyes and make you want to scream trying to find an interesting news story. By clicking through the pictures or browsing the recent news feed, you can find up to date news. Also, you can search a topic that interests you and limit it by relevance, most recent, and related news stories. This site works!
_______________________________________________________________
Return to Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage
]]>
First, I really liked Greta's blog because I agree with her 100%. Objectivity is ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE!
The example Greta gave where she said people would find bias if she wrote "John, haunted by his past" was an excellent example. She said they might be moved to pity John because of your word choice. That's true, you might be more compelled to sympathize with him. But what if he was a mass murderer!!?? Just through words alone Greta made this mass murdering John look feeble and worth your pity.
Also, with that example, someone could tear it apart and say Greta believes in ghosts. She thinks the past can really come back and "haunt" you. Greta aligns with Buddhist beliefs because she believes in Karma (the past coming back to bite you). While none of this may be true, people will inevitably pick apart what a journalist says just to find some fault.
That is the true problem when it comes to whether or not a reporter is being "objective": people will pick apart everything you say just to find bias or faults. There is no way of escaping this, no matter how conciously you try to eliminate bias statements from your writing.
________________________________________________________________
Return to Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage.
]]>According to the News Manual, defamation lawsuits "should not be a problem if you do your job properly by taking care over how you gather information, how you check that it is true and how you write accurately, sticking to facts."
I don't think this is as easy as the News Manual would have you think. Take for instance Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's wife Maria Shriver:
Maria Shriver has been all over the news for using a cell phone while driving. Apparently, her husband (Schwarzenegger) passed a law that banned the use of cell phones while driving. So, not only was she breaking the law, but she was breaking her husband's law. According to CNN.com, Shriver was not cited for breaking the law even though "the California Highway Patrol had issued tickets for about 150,000 cell phone infractions" according to Chris Cochran, spokesman for the California Office of Traffic Safety as quoted at CNN.com.
Now, does this put Schwarzenegger in a bad light? Yeah, it does. He should have enforced the law for his wife also. Does it put her in a bad light? You betcha!
Just the simple fact that she was not fined makes her case even worse. Yes, she did commit the act (fact) and its her fault it happened in the first place, but just by telling readers that she was not fined (fact) makes her look even worse. Though, I don't think a defemation case would go over so well if she chose to sue news reporters. Afterall, she was breaking the law in the first place.
I think another place where we saw reporters defaming a politician is in the case of Sarah Palin:
I think you know where I am going with this. It is my opinion that she lost McCain the election because the media made her come across as an uneducated nit-wit, unfit to be our Vice President. Now, I do not say that she is a nit-wit, I never met her. The media portrayed her that way. If I was Sarah Palin, I would take what was left of my campaign money or the $1 million I got from my book deal and would sue all the major news networks (and SNL) for defamation of character. I think she would have a very strong case there.
Return to Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage
More on Investigative Reporting and Defamation of Character
]]>Click here to see how we use blogging to enhance our learning outside the classroom.
Coverage/Depth
WANTED for Defamation: Invesitgative Reporters:$50 a head- In this blog I look at the problems of defemation of character in investigative journalism. I pulled in two case (Sarah Palin and Maria Shriver) in which I felt the news portrayed these people in a negative light.
Discussion/Interaction
Objectivity Is Impossible: A Response to Greta Carroll's Blog- I'm responding to Greta Carroll's blog entry "Finally, Someone Admits Objectivity is Impossible!" Alot of people found her blog helpful and I wanted to add a few points to the discussion.
Timeliness
Xenoblogging
Random Other
_____________________________________________________________
Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage
Click here to find out how blogging helps extend learning outside the classroom.
All the blogs (except for the Christina Korbe blog) in this portfolio are from the Robert J. Haiman Blog Series. For my News Writing class, we are reading Haiman's online book, Best Practices for Newspaper Journalists. We then write blog entries discussing certain sections from the book.
By clicking the Robert J, Haiman link above, you can see the blog entries I wrote that pertain to his book. Also, there are links so you can find what other students have to say about his book.
Below, I have listed the blog entries in the designated categories.
Coverage/Depth/Xenoblogging
For this portfolio, all of my blog entries had some level of depth and coverage. I especially tried to relate what we were learning in class to actual news stories. By writing about news my classmates were familiar with, I hoped that they would have a better understanding of the topics we were discussing.
In Defense of Christina Korbe: Editorial Writing- The topic of discussion for this blog entry was the purpose of editorials. Rather than discussing what editorials are and what they should/not do, I showed where editorial writers failed to give an individual a voice. That individual would be Christina Korbe (the woman convicted of killing Special Agent Sam Hicks). I break down key points of argument from her case and how editorial writers could have used that information to give this woman a voice when noone else would.
Incompetence or Following the Rules?- Here I list the problem readers have with newspapers: They do not attribute their sources. Then I give solutions to the problem. One solution I came up with is writing the attributions the way magazines do. Or, newspapers could make one page of attributions for readers to reference.
Invasion of Privacy- Like the Christina Korbe blog on editorials, here I took a real life news story and showed how news writers failed to cover it in an ethical manner. The case I discuss was the murder of Caylee Anthony. Caset, Caylee's mother, was arrested for her murder. Casey's parents, George and Condy were relentlessly hounded by reporters and civilians who destroyed their property, got in their faces, and called them baby-killers. Obviously, the reporters crossed the line of ethics and good reporting.
Interaction/Discussion
The Oops! Section- While this blog wasn't my most indepth or lengthy, it did receive alot of attention outside the blogging realm. Basically, I discuss why newspapers wouldn't want to create a section to acknowledge their mistakes (the oops! section). The reasons would seem obvious, but many people voiced their own opinions on the issue to me after I wrote this blog. This blog was also part of the Haiman Blog Entry Series.
Timeliness
All of my blog entries for this portfolio were submitted on time. Incompetence or Following the Rules? was submitted two days in advance.
_________________________________________________________
News Writing vs. Blogging: Round 1
News Writing vs. Bloggin: Round 2
Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage
]]>
"A woman whose daughter was murdered on her 19th birthday said: “Our lives became a nightmare. Our yard, our street and neighborhood were suddenly covered with reporters and cameras at all hours for several days. A neighbor told us she had seen a writer actually putting our trash bag in his car and speeding away. They put our family finances in the paper, which was totally irrelevant in the murder of our daughter” (Haiman 30).
According to Robert Haiman's Best Practices for Newspaper Journalists, many readers feel that journalists invade the privacy of those who are "suddenly and unexpectedly thrust into the news" (29).
I believe those readers are right. Here's my proof. Remember this story?:
"In the summer of 2008, Orlando, Fla. toddler Caylee Anthony disappeared, only to be discovered six months later a short distance from her home, her skeletal remains stuffed in plastic bags and her mouth sealed with duct tape. Her mother, Casey Anthony, was charged with the horrific crime after not reporting her daughter missing for a month, and allegedly lying to police" (CBS News).
Following Casey's arrest, Caylee's grandparents (Cindy and George) were constantly harrassed. Reporters and citizens would get up in their face and call them killers. They would destroy their property. Drive by and snap pictures. Destroy the peace they deserve. Cindy and George were not the people convicted in Caylee's murder. Her mother was. Yet, the grandparents suffered because the media and the citizens could not dissassociate them from Casey. (The Untold Story of Caylee Anthony).
The problem with the logic of these reporters and citizens is apparent to those of us who are removed from the situation. This would be like my brother keying your neighbor's car, so you come up in my face and harrass me everyday (even though it was not your car and even though my brother already paid the fine).
However, the point still stands: reporters (and citizens) are invasive. The bigger the story, the more invasive.
__________________________________________________________________
]]>
Click to see more peer responses about (pages 1-16).
Incompetence or Following the Rules?-
Click to see more peer responses about (pages 17- 28).
Click to see more peer responses about (pages 29-42).
Objectivity Is Impossible: A Response to Greta Carroll's Blog
Click to see more peer responses about (pages 43-56).
Click to see more peer responses about (pages 57-67).
_____________________________________________________________
*These entries were written for Dr. Jerz's News Writing class at Seton Hill University.
News Writing vs. Blogging:
]]>One newspaper reader remarked:
when asked what he thought about reporters using anonymous sources in articles (18).
I agree. Though some people would argue that this is an accepted practice in journalism, I find that it is an easy way for reporters to make up facts, quotes, and to stretch the truth. Reporters cannot be held as accountable for what they write if the editor has no way to check up on their "facts." Likewise, the reader cannot trust what the reporter is saying if there is no name attached to the source. For all we know, those statistics on childhood obesity that Reporter Smiley wrote in his article came from Joe Sixpak of 113 Hootin' Holler Lane.
Solutions
There needs to be a system in which reporters attribute facts to certain people.
1.) This could be done simply through citing the source in the sentence like magazines do. For instance, Cosmopolitan might write something like:
If a magazine can do it and readers buy up magazines, newspapers can do it to.
2.) Another way newspapers could ensure they are citing sources is to leave a page at the end of the paper (like magazines do so you can find out where to buy those beauty products you saw on page 36) where they list the sources with a page number and small description linking it to the article in the paper.
3.) Readers could be refered to a webpage where a list of sources is named.
These are my solutions...what are yours?
When journalists use anonymous sources, are they incompetent or just following the rules? Robert J. Haiman's Best Practices for Newspaper Journalists has the answer (pages 17-28).
_____________________________________________________________________________
Return to Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage.
The Oops! Section: My take on more of Haiman's Best Practices for Newspaper Journalists
]]>"There is a broad feeling in the public that newspapers not only make too many mistakes, but that they also are unwilling to correct them fully and promptly" (page 13).
Print News
Many newspapers frequently hide their Oops! We Made a Mistake section. Some people view this as dishonest, saying newspapers don't want to admit faults. But honestly, how many people do you know who run around the streets proclaiming their faults? What newspaper is going to put it's Oops! Section on the front page? And really, what reader wanted to see corrections on a previous article plastered, first, on the front page? Even thought Haiman states, "Not one member of the public in our roundtables said he or she thought seeing many more corrections would diminish the credibility of the newspaper," I highly doubt it (13). Especially if there are 4.5 to 2.5 mistakes per page like the Tribune used to have (11). "Most said it would make them less skeptical and the paper more believable" (13). Yea, right. I seriously doubt that, especially if I tell you they can still be biased by choosing which corrections to advertise, and which to not.
Television News
Now I will defend this statement for the television news stations. Last night (October 19, 2009), KDKA ran an apology for showing the wrong video clip. The anchor was talking about the Ponzi Scheme in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. It involved 58-year-old Eugene Miley.
Instead of showing a clip of Eugene Miley, they showed a clip of another man. So, last night, Stacy Smith made a heart felt apology to the man.
SO....... it is true that television media would have a very difficult time hiding the apology for the mistake. There Oops! Section can't be hidden in the text. It has to be voiced just like any other piece of news information. So, in a way, television news stations are forced into admitting their faults.
______________________________________________________
Return to Dr. Jerz's News Writing Webpage
]]>Here is a case where I would have written an editorial coming to the defense of Christina Korbe:
Following the fatal shooting of FBI Special Agent Sam Hicks (Nov. 19, 2008), many were ready to throw Christina Korbe into prison for life, or better yet, end her life with a lethal injection. She was the woman who pulled the trigger, ending Hicks's life.
In the year since Hicks's death, Korbe was tried for his murder. She did not receive the death penalty. Her case is still pending.
The incident occured when Sam Hicks entered the Korbe residence in the early morning (while it was still dark) to serve a warrant to Robert Korbe on drug charges.
Hicks "led a team of agents in breaking down the front door and charging into the home" when he "was shot by the drug suspect's wife, who told police she thought he was an intruder, authorities said" (Woman charged, jailed).
The following is from "Woman charged in agent's death jailed" found in the Tribune Review the day after the incident (Nov. 20, 2008):
According to the criminal complaint:
Korbe and his wife were in bed when officers surrounded the house on Woods Run Road, knocked on the door at 6:03 a.m. and announced themselves as police officers with a warrant for Robert Korbe's arrest.
The bearded Hicks watched through a door window as Robert Korbe ran through the house. Hicks ordered other officers to break down the door.
The officers, repeatedly announcing themselves as police, rammed the door a number of times before it broke. Hicks was the first one inside.
Other officers saw him make a quick left turn as he entered and then heard a single gunshot. Hicks shouted, "I'm hit!" and fell to the ground.
He was dragged outside by other officers, who performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation until paramedics arrived.
Christina Korbe called 911 at 6:05 a.m. and told emergency dispatchers that she believed her home was being burglarized and that she shot an intruder with a .38-caliber handgun. She was still on the phone when officers ran upstairs and took her into custody.
She told police that after her husband ran downstairs, she grabbed a gun from the bedroom closet, stood at the top of the staircase, reached around the corner and fired a single shot down the stairs. She said she did not know that those who broke down the door were police officers.
Robert Korbe said when the front door window was broken, he knew it was the police, so he ran into the basement to retrieve cocaine from a file cabinet and flush it down the washtub. He ran out the back door, where he was arrested."
In all the reports surrounding this case, no one took the side of Christina Korbe. I do, and I think she was unjustly punished. If I were writing an editorial piece on this case, I would write something like this:
Imagine it's a cold November night, perfect for sleeping. You're curled up in your bed, safe and sound with your children sleeping softly in the next room. At 6:30 in the morning, before the sun has even peaked it's rays above the horizon, your front door is smashed in and you are wrenched from your sleep. You look for your husband in the bed next to you so he can go find out what's happening. He isn't there. Your heart is pounding. Someone is breaking into your home and you can't find your husband.
You know there is a shot gun kept in your room. It was put there in case something like this would happen, but you never truly thought it would. You grab the gun and creep to the head of the stairs.
As you peer down, you see a figure in the darkness climbing the stairs. The door to your children's bedroom is at the head of the stairs and you panic. My babies! You have to stop this intruder. You have no other choice. Your chidlren are in danger. You fire the gun.
Now you may say, "Big deal. Jeanine is exagerating here to make a point. What a bad editorial writer she is, slanting views and all."
I will reply with this:
From "'Take care of my babies,' suspect pleads":
But she said her sister "Chrissie," the youngest of six children, was concerned about safety in her home because someone broke in several months ago while the family vacationed in Florida. Township police could not be reached to verify that a break-in occurred.
"They stole a motorcycle. And (the Korbes) thought people had been stealing firewood from the backyard for a while," Wakmunski said.
You don't think I have some case here in defense of Christina Korbe? She was concerned about her family from the start because there home had been burglarized before. She kept a gun in her home (for which she received child endangerment charges) to protect her family in case the intruders came again. When Hicks knocked down the door early in the morning, what was she supposed to think?
What would YOU have done?
Christina Korbe was protecting her children from what she thought was an intruder. She did not kill Hicks in cold blood. She does not deserve life in prison.
______________________________________________________________________
