There are lawyers who are First Amendment Specialists? I never knew that; it's almost sad that we need people to specialize in defending our freedom of speech. Then again, it's sad there are yellow journalists who bring about the need for First Amendment Specialists as well. Quite a pickle, isn't it? I don't think it will ever change, no matter how many books are published on the subject.
I don't understand why libel has become such a huge issue. Don't people know not to spread incorrect information in a public forum? Then again, in all reality, isn't it the same as telling somebody privately? That person can spread the information as well, and could even misinterpret what the original tidbit was.
I guess libel is specifiaclly PRINTED b.s. though- pardon my crudeness.
Maybe I'm just horribly idealistic, but I just don't understand why we all can't get along. I understand people have personal vendettas or things like that, but let's be mature here people. I know this little rant isn't going to change the world but I do think that maturity plays a big part. It takes a much bigger person to keep quiet than it does to spread nasty things, even if they ARE true.
Ack! Will it ever change?
I know I personally would never publish ANYTHING ANYWHERE that I didn't know was 100% true. That's hard to come by, the truth, but wouldn't the extra time it took to find the truth in the long run pay off? If everything published was truthful, well, I wouldn't have a reason to be complaining now would I?
In chapter 8 of We the Media, Gillmor talks about the increasing number of people publishing their thoughts, work, and news on the internet. On page 162, Gilmor says that a survey of adult internet users showed that slightly less than half used the internet for publishing. In addition, he says the survey took into account users under 18, that number would rise significantly.
I find one problem with this. Accounting for internet users under 18 would indeed rise that number, but most teens publish online because it's such a huge trend now. I've looked over some blogs, livejournals, and other online diaries of teens, and the content is less than newsworthy to put it lightly.
I'm not sure if the point here is simply that so many more people are now using the internet for publishing purposes, or that things published on the internet are a good source for news.
I'd have to say the majority of the people under 18 who publish on the web are talking about the fight they had last night with their boyfriend and not about, let's say, the war in Iraq.
So as I've said before, the internet very well could be a valuable source for news that reporters may have missed, but soembody is going to have to dig through all the teen angst to actually find something newsworthy.
I think I've solved my motivational (or lackthereof) problems.
I just felt like life was so repititious- sleep, school, work, homework, sleep, school... I was just tired of everything. The days I didn't work I always would go visit my mom and little brother, I'd spend time with my friends to stay somewhat sane. I think everybody feels me here. We've all felt this way, more than once maybe.
I felt like I had no time to myself to relax. I would eat one meal a day if anything because I didn't have time.
I would always tell my mom there simply aren't enough hours in the day. So, I took it upon myself to extend my day. I do not go to bed before 3 am, ever.
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday I wake up at 7:30, throw a hat on and go to class by 8. Tuesday and Thursday I usually sleep until 1 or so to be at class by two.
So, yeah on Mon., Wed., and Fri. I'm was a little sluggish in the morning- but I caught up on all that sleep on Tuesday and Thursday, and probably one weekend day.
I usually still only eat once a day, WHICH IS BAD, but I just stuff my face at night during my 'me time.' Haha I sound like I should be the most unhealthy person alive right now. Plus, the worst time to eat is before bed.
My epiphany is that my body has adjusted to this pattern. It's currently 2 am on the nose and I just wrote a blog before this as well. Haha! Admittedly, I'm a huge dork.
I found time for myself to relax and do things that are PRODUCTIVE yet are things that I ENJOY...like blogging! =)
I finally found the perfect time to blog.
I'm being constructive. I'm proud.
Today in news writing, Evan gave a wonderful presentation that inspired a question. Unfortunately, I did not present the question in class because other students had their hands raised and time was running short.
Yes, weblogs are a fantastic means for the common man to report news, announce information, publish personal stories, etc. As we discussed in class, weblogs are not the sole medium in internet reporting- there are forums, wikis(one of my personal favorites that actually wasn't mentioned in class), personal sites, e-mail- the list is almost endless.
This discussion reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend not too long ago. I always talk about school with my best friend, Megan, and welogs come up frequently. She is a Sophomore at the comminity college. After mentioning something about blogging, I remember her saying to me, "Just what are these blog things, I mean, Rosie O'Donnel apparently has one even!"
This question always baffles me- what is a blog? PAH!
Which brings me to my point: There is such a strong divide between people who are internet-saavy and those who are not.
With that said, there are people who do frequent the world wide web, but don't even know what a blog is.
So to us, blogging news(having the ability to post news instantly for billions of people, primarily) may seem like a news phenomenon, and in all reality it is- there's just one problem. When will the mass media look to blogs for the bulk of their news? Will this ever happen? Will any random Joe have the chance to be an anchorman just because all he heeds to do is read a teleprompter, since there are people just hashing through blogs for news to simply relay it on the television?
I really don't know- but I'm leaning towards probably not. Because part of the problem IS having to hash through blogs to find what is actually newsworthy, not to mention the time it would take to find proof the news is even true. There's just not enough time to go through all the blogs on the planet fast enough in hopes of finding a breaking story.
So we can say that blogging is a news phenomenon- and I agree it is, because I know at least one other person will probably read these words. Without blogs, these thoughts would only be little dittys in my head.
BUT: I think the main problem is, aside from the fact there are too many blogs to even begin to start with (unless the media would only browse the blogs of impportant public figures) is the trust issue. We don't know what to trust on the internet.
When speaking directly to people for investigating the news, we trust what people say to us. Mainly because libel and slander laws are public knowledge and the public knows how to conduct themselves in any type of interwiew properly(at least I'd like to think so); it's all morals.
If we simply took things from blogs and slapped them on the television or in a news publication, the court system would be blocked up with libel and slander cases, I'm sure.
Then on the other hand perhaps the knowledge that anything from any blog could be taken for news would force people to use proper 'netiquette', and the same standards they use when in an interview.
I'm not sure I have any strong concluding points. It's almost 2 AM and I just sat down, and started typing away.
I feel the blogging enthusiasm coming back. =)
I'm sitting here at school waiting for the Westmoreland Symphonic Winds (WSW) concert to start. Why? Because I thought it started at 6:30...well it starts at 8- 45 more minutes to go. I rushed home when I got off work at 5 to freshen up, scooted out the door by 6:10 already frazzled because I thought I was going to waltz in late.
So what happens when I pull into A-lot? I see nothing but a desolate campus. I was a little confused to say the least. At least there are people here waiting now! I don't feel so alone. I was here before the musicians even got here, haha. Oh well!
I was also worried I was underdressed. I have on a nice black sweater with silver stripes, a silver belt, jeans and boots. Luckily I'm not the only one wearing jeans. There are some women in pant suits though. I felt a little awkward waiting around by myself so I ducked into a computer lab.
I'm covering for News Writing. My article will mainly focus on the WSW and what the meaning of the concert is. If anybody knew Beth Ann Johnson and Elyse Jeanne Saraceni (SHU students and first season WSW members killed in the 1988 terrorist bombing of Pan Am flight 103), or you just have input about the concert, please let me know because it would be very valuable to my article.
If you leave your comments here please leave your first and last name, what year student you are/ official title, etc. Feel free to E-mail me at Sunandstorm@aol.com if you do not wish to leave your feedback in a public forum.
I'm very interested in learning more about their lives. Who were they? What were their hobbies? I would love some anecdotes to include in my article.
Even feedback about the concert itself would be wonderful!
Well, I think it's about time I get myself a seat!
Well, here it is. Not quite as good as the last one, the strep throat had me down and out for about a week. Lovely, I assure you.
I'm proud to say not all of my entries are last minute. I've just had the most apathetic attitude toward blogging that I can't shake, not just for school, but in general. I barely write in my diary anymore.
It just seems like finding TIME to blog is the hardest. By the time I'm done with school, work, and all of my other homework, blogging is the last thing I want to do. SLEEP is the first.
I'm just having a really hard time figuring out WHAT I want to say about the readings. I feel like what I have to say may be not be intelligent or I may be wrong, I don't know. I'm not an avid fan of factual reading, so blogging about it is even worse for me.
I did learn a lot from these books though, and I put what I've learned in my blog from time to time. I just need a little motivation I guess. I think I'd rather just discuss readings orally rather than blog about them, because that's what I am so used to from high school...I like oral discussions much more.
You want us to do what!? -my response to a scary in-class writing activity. (timliness)
Mountain, molehill, bah! -Journalists unite! against this book, anyways. I'm not a fan, but they do have some good points. (timeliness, discussion)
IANS. -expressing my hatred for this book even more, it really irked me. (depth)
Amanda Speaks! -Setonian's beloved news editor comes to speak to the class on her experience with journalism in 'the real world'
Color. -ah, colorful diction reminds me of high school.
DiScUsSiOnS
this entry I wrote sparked a discussion about IANS, and how it's unfair to journalists.
UUUUGGGH! Will somebody tell me how they keep track of the blogs they've commented on? I'm going back and picking through everybody's but I can't seem to find any of the comments I've left. I'm aggitated, this always seems to be my problem. Well, there's one link for discussion at least. I did leave more comments but I can't find them.
The chapter in The AP Guide to Newswriting that talks about encorporating color into your writing took me way back to my honors english class in 10th grade. Good ole' Mrs. Kihn and her obsession with Mel Gibson.
Anyway:
She pounded COLORFUL DICTION into our heads. If not for her, I would be a very bland writer. All over our papers in red ink would be, 'use more colorful diction!' By the end of the year, my writing had more color than a Big Box of Crayola crayons.
Reading this chapter gave me a little hope- because now I know my writing doesn't have to be *THAT* dry. I started second guessing journalism because I love using descriptive language. Now I know I just have to encorporate it the correct way.
Amanda Cochran, news editor for the Setonian, came to speak to our News Writing class the other day.
I thought her presentation was a great first-hand insight to the world of news writing.
Amanda is an intern for the Tribune-Review, our local newspaper. She spoke to us about her experiences working for a large scale paper, not just our beloved student produced paper. =)
Basically the main point I felt Amanda had for us was be persistent and patient. She said that sources for articles may not always come easily, a lesson I've learned time and time again just from working on the Setonian.
I've always wanted to experience was a real news room was like, and Amanda gave me a peek into my future *hopefully*. I was glad to hear Amanda said that her editor followed along with her most places, because I would definitely need that support as a newbie.
One thing I wanted to ask Amanda was how she adapted to being a newbie for the trib after being news editor for the Setonian. I wanted to see what kind of changes she had to make to her attitude and her way or writing, if any at all.
So, usually I read the assigned chapter in bed and pass out directly after. So last night I went back and re-read chapter 4 through the end of It Ain't Necessarily So(IANS).
Did I mention that this book irritates me to no end?
First of all, it seems to me like every chapter is exactly the same, I know the entire book is only really proving one point, but the chapters are so mundane. I always felt like I was reading the same chapter- I had to check back to see which number I was reading!
I often got confused at what the book was trying to explain, like in chapter 4, what exactly IS a proxy? That was the whole basis of the chapter, yet I had no idea what it was. Is a proxy the actual survey itself, or what the surveys were based on? I think they needed to explain a little better before they just jumped in complaining about journalists.
I also HATED the little remarks in parentheses that never ended. It was just a way to get a low jab in on journalists. Grow up! Sorry, I'm a little testy. It's early.
I just wish they would have offered a solution instead of just complaining about journalists lack to correctly report the results of statistics.
I really don't feel that all the blame needs to be put on journalists. How are they supposed to correctly interpret the data? One person may have a completely different understanding of the results than another person, which will surely lead to differences in reporting. Does these differences REALLY prove that all journalists are incompetent? I definitely don't think so. One news station/magazine may just want to take a different approach to reporting the results than another.
One of my favorite complatints: in IANS, they say that one news station reported an increase in two-parent families, and another reported an increase in single-parents families as well.
Well...couldn't this be the case? Why not? Isn't the population growing by the minute? To me, both statistics make sense even though they were derived from the same set of research. Maybe I'm just reading things wrong.
Why is the blame solely on journalists? Shouldn't the people who come up with the results be to blame for not going to the greatest lengths possible to attain accurate results? To me, it sounds like they're asking all the wrong questions, which is why they're coming up with 'shady' results.
Aren't journalists just supposed to report what they find? I don't think any journalist would intentionally mislead the people, if they have any ethics or morals whatsoever. Sure, maybe journalists do create a little more drama than needed-- I don't think sounding like the guy from the Clear Eyes commercials every night would be very appealing to viewers, or when put into text, readers.
This whole book just made me mad. I just felt it was a ton of yapping about things that probably won't change. Why not aim the book directly at the source of the answers journalists report rather than the journalists themselves? I just don't understand it.
Maybe I'm missing something.