Math for Journalists

Math for journalists, huh? I never thought I would ever see a math course ever again in my college career since becoming a journalist student. Well it turns out this is not the case. Math is a crucial part of journalism and therefore every journalists needs to know some kind of math. Numbers can be very aggravating but these numbers, particularly accurate numbers, help journalists give readers the full in-depth information they are looking for.

Dr. Jerz gave us these three examples:

  • I ate half as many donuts in 2015 as in 2016
  • In 2016, there was a 200% increase in the number of donuts I ate.
  • There was a 50% decrease in the number of donuts I ate in 2015 as compared to 2016.

The first example is okay. It is short and simple but doesn’t give the exact number of donuts eaten and for some reason this may be crucial to some people. The second example seems to be a little exaggerated. The 200% is not a true statistic and could mis-inform readers. The third example, is a bit long so it just needs reworded and cut down a few words.

Since, our class discussion on math and the journalism world, I have looked up a few videos on percentages through Khan Academy. It feels a little weird to be dealing with numbers again but it is a good thing because someday in the realm of professional journalism I could be doing just that. Source: Math for Journalists

Portfolio 3

I have reached portfolio 3. There has not been as much readings since the previous portfolios I have completed. Therefore the past few blog posts for me I have really explored and put to thought what I have learned so far in journalism.

Depth:

One of my more recent articles that I went into depth was the article about Snowden and journalists. The article covered the depths of what Snowden and his journalists companions did to inform people and even faced risk of consequences. The second article I went into detail with is the article about good writing. I went into detail about what sparked my interest in this article and reflected what I read with my current knowledge of journalism.

 

Riskiness:

One of my more riskier post was the post about my blog post on the left or right bias chart. This post was risky in terms of the way I posted. I didn’t really write about the article itself, I instead wrote about personal experiences with left and right side social media. I would also classify the Snowden article as risky as well. I blogged about a topic that might be sensitive to some people on the topic of national security and privacy.

Discussion:

I would my Snowden article received comments from peers. The post drew attention from other students to discuss the ideas of what Snowden and the journalists did to risk their security and privacy. They did this to inform people, and I think this post showed that and engaged with other students.

Intertextuality:

A post suitable for this section is my post on clickbait and bias. The post was more on a source of my own, social media rather than the actual article. Another post that would suit this is the post where I blogged about good writing. The post demonstrates my ability to comprehend the article I read as well as connect it to ideas I have learned.

Timeliness: 

My post about chapter seven and the first amendment was not exactly on time. I expressed what I thought but it could have been done sooner.

Coverage: 

A post I had the most coverage on would be the fake news post. I engaged with the topic and went into detail from my own experiences to what the article said to express the risk of fake news. I think this post covered all aspects of coverage.

Conclusion:

Overall I think this portfolio was sufficient. I feel my post have been more in depth and timely as well with the exception of one post. I think I have improved upon my writings since day one and really have dove into the field of journalism and the knowledge I have learned. I look forward to writing more posts in the future. Source: Portfolio 3

What is Good Writing?

I found this article to be a good read. I found this part of the passage intriguing, “The English language is derived from two main sources. One is latin the florid language of Ancient Rome. The other is Anglo-Saxon, the plain languages of England and northern Rome.” This section was particularly interesting to read to get a sense of history behind our English language. Words that end in -ion or -ent are derived from these ancient languages. This was something new that was brought to my attention. The passage also talked about active and passive verbs which for myself a student journalist, is something I need to be aware of and comprehend to my full capability in order to succeed in the professional realm of journalism. This article also sparked my interest with the phrases, “Short is always better than long.” and “Simple is good.” So far in Newswriting the main priority of my writing is to inform with factual quotes and creditable sources but also to keep the stories short and to the point. One of the main lessons that has been instilled in me since day one of being a student journalist is to keep the stories short. They should be simplistic and newsworthy.

Source: What is Good Writing?

PAJ Ch 7

In PAJ Ch 7, I noticed this passage, “The First Amendment, enshrined in the Bill of Rights, remains deceptively straightforward: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof: or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a a redress of grievances.” (Craft & Davis 181)

I really liked this part of the chapter. Most modern day people are aware of the rights and the first amendment but don’t really know what it means as far as words go. This part really emphasized what congress can do. I feel is severely important to know as a citizen. The first amendment not only affects you as an individual but also higher powers as well.

Source: PAJ Ch 7

Vanessa Otero’s Complex vs. Clickbait, Liberal vs. Conservative Media Chart

This blog post was interesting to read. The chart I may not totally agree with as I think CNN should not be in the middle but it does draw some conclusions about fake news. This made me think about the time  Was talking with a friend about left or right side news. I told my friend, Sean Mrozek to check out the blog website, the Medium. My friend quickly started to ask me if the site was left or right sided. I told him the site contains blogs from all kinds of different genres. Soon after, I looked at his social media feeds and he shares things that are all Pro-Trump related. I shared an article with him that bashed Trump and he told me this was fake news and hid the post from his feed. I guess it is all up to the reader to decipher through the bias and unbiased companies. All readers should be influenced to get both sides then form an opinion.

Source: Vanessa Otero’s Complex vs. Clickbait, Liberal vs. Conservative Media Chart