Israeli Prime Minister Fights Local Media
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has a long, rocky relationship with the Israeli media.
The latest in news-industry issues, as written by multimedia journalism and integrated marketing communication students at Simpson College.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has a long, rocky relationship with the Israeli media.

TechCrunch recently had a post by Alexia Tsotsis about how the journalists of the future are "you."
Tsotsis talks about how people "are functioning as defacto news aggregators" using currently available tools like Twitter and Facebook. However, much of this information is useless due to the sheer number of tweets and the tiny piece of the picture they provide. That is, unless, it can be organized in some way.
When people (mostly independent of the larger news networks) put a lot of effort into curating and making sense of the hundreds of tweets coming in, they often provided a more concrete picture of what was happening in Egypt and even Tunisia than the large networks who didn't put a lot of stock in those sources. (She notes that Al Jazeera was one of the few mainstream sources covering it well).
This article struck me not only because we are doing many of the same things as these people with our weekly Twitter assignments but because this is the first time we are actually able to witness these tools being used in this way in great numbers and over a long period of time.
People are even using YouTube to get information and direct video of riots with a speed news networks would be hard pressed to replicate.
Accuracy is a real problem, but then others can call Twitter users out on inaccuracy almost as fast as they can post news. The "real" media shouldn't disappear by any means; someone still needs to check the facts with a high degree of accuracy. This does mean that we have the capability to get more news, and even better, real news, out there with nothing more than our eyeballs and the click of a mouse. We are reaching the point where it's nearly impossible to keep the truth from getting out, one way or another. That should be every journalist's goal.
Photo Credit: Creative Commons

There are many different types of vlogs (video blogs) today. Many people consider all of these different types of vlogs journalism, but do they really share news with us?
The one type of vlog I have questions about is video diaries. A video diary is a vlog where a person tapes him/her self and discusses his/her opinions, thoughts, and experiences. I have seen many of these vlogs, and I'm not sure I would consider them journalism. I realize that this blog that I am writing now is simply my thoughts and opinions on video diary vlogs; so is this blog considered journalism?
It's difficult for me to say that a vlog about someone discussing their trip to the mall or how their day was could be considered news. After all, many of these vlogs do not impact the audience in any way. A great deal of them do not have any of the seven news honored values. Most are for sheer entertainment, and that is why they receive so many views and subscribers.
For example, Shane Dawson has his own YouTube channel, but there is no actual news in his vlogs. He simply discusses what experiences he has had, and he also makes little skits to entertain his audience. This is considered a video diary, but I would not consider this news. There are countless other vloggers who do the same thing.
I have yet to come across a video diary vlog that is news worthy. I have searched YouTube and Yahoo video up and down and still haven't found any that abide to the seven news honored values. If anyone does know of one please write it in a comment. I'd enjoy viewing it.
Photo Credit: Fagstein
Bit.ly, a site that lets people shorten and share links, recently added a new tool to its website. Users are now able to "bundle" URLs.
Does it ever seem like all you see online are topics about who's going to rehab, who got divorced, who wore what to the latest fashion show, or stories about the "bare-foot bandit"? Why have newspapers (both online and in print) chosen to run more articles on seemingly unimportant topics as opposed to the real issues? Because those are the types of stories that sell.
Based on a recent article Washington Post writer Paul Farhi writing for the American Journalism Review, consumers are more interested in these types of topics than they are ones that thirty years ago would have been considered newsworthy.
Farhi states that if you check out any major news network, you will find a list of top-viewed and most recommended links and videos to watch (CBS, NBC, ABC to name a few). Go to one now and see what you find. Chances are the top hits are not all going to be on the war in Iraq or what the Tea Party is up to, but articles that have headlines that jump out. Novelty is becoming increasingly more important these days.
Does that mean that these topics are any less important than they were in the time of Walter Cronkite and Peter Jennings? Not necessarily, but the people behind the scenes of newspapers have realized that they just aren't going to bring in the money as they once did.
I believe a reason for the switch in headline "stories" is the changing audience. Younger consumers tend to be more aware of what is going on in the world without needing to be reminded of it 24-7. We have access to all these amazing online tools and resources to allow us to get short tidbits of stories without needing to sit down and read a newspaper to do so. For the older generation, however, they still rely on newspapers to get their information (and do they honestly care if Britney has cleaned up her act).
While is is unnerving to think that we care more about people's personal lives than we do real issues, hopefully newspapers and online sources alike can find a way to continue attracting consumers to their products, so that we do not lose anything and everything newsworthy.
We have magazines and tabloids for a reason, and newspapers should not feel that they need to compete with them.
With the race to make it online, journalists are learning to use social media sites, and the users of these sights, to their advantage.
Future journalists will be more a part of the community than ever. Bloggers will be relied on for credible sources. Everyone will become a part of social media by reporting what they see.
It used to be the journalists telling the community what they should know. Now it's become an online conversation of news between the two.
Community members have become their own journalists. They are already reporting the news around them using social media. Journalists need to learn how to use this to their advantage. Social media platforms shouldn't be used just as a way to get readers back to your site.
Social sites such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube will become social media platforms for the news. These sites have become like editors by telling readers what's important. Readers are curious about what friends are saying and looking at.
Along with this, a new job will arise for those who can curate all the information flying around. Readers don't always have time to sift through everything. Important information can be pieced together from social media sites into a story. Storyful is currently working on using information from sites like Twitter and Youtube to do just this.
Technology is constantly changing. Once you have what you think is the latest and greatest invention; someone bursts your bubble with something better. We want everything fast and free, so our friends at Google helped us out.
Many of us are aware of the new "instant search" that Google now provides. It makes searching even more quick and efficient.
What if YouTube does the same? Feross Aboukhadijeh, a Stanford junior and Facebook intern did just that. How did he do it? Three hours of coding.
If you're like me, you can't code at all and don't know the first thing about it. That is why I am amazed how Aboukhadijeh sat at his computer for three hours and all of a sudden became a famous contributor to the Internet.
YouTube offered Aboukhadijeh a job via Twitter but since he is an intern with Facebook had to decline the offer. So you won't find YouTube Instant on youtube.com.
Although it is still considered Youtube, it's actually called YouTube Instant. You have to go to Aboukhadijeh's site.
Google search for "YouTube Instant", or I'll make it even easier for you. Go to YouTube Instant and try it yourself.
Honestly, I think this is a great idea. The video starts literally starts searching after each key punch. On the downfall, it's only great if you know exactly what you're looking for. Otherwise it can get a bit annoying. Another is you can't click where ever on the stream to play whatever you desire. That option is simply not there. Also, fast internet is a must to get the full effect. My apologies to those who still use dial-up. I strongly suggest an upgrade.
We've been hearing it a lot lately. Facebook and Twitter are two social networking sites that can help your business thrive.
In May of 2008, judges in Turkey banned its citizens from accessing YouTube, under the justification that the Web site failed to obtain authorization to operate within the country. Now, two years later, according to a March 9 article by Clothilde Le Coz featured on MediaShift, newspapers in Turkey are organizing to protest what they view as a suppression of freedoms of speech.
© Blogger template On The Road by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009
Back to TOP