By: Allison McNeal
Print newspapers are starting to face opposition by large media corporations.
Leslie Moonves, chief executive officer of CBS Corp., recently stated how the corporation wants to move away from print media and more towards the Internet.
With the purchase of CNET, the company got an instant boost and may become a major player in the media world. The main aim of the corporation is to shift the corporation away from an older media company to a technologically advanced one.
According to Wired.com, the CEO "plans to position his company as a one stop shop for news and information, potentially eliminating the need for dead tree media." He exclusively stated that 'one of the advantages of the Internet is [that] we’re taking money away from the newspapers.'
This statement was opposed strongly by many blogtalkers, including Phil Bronstein. Bronstein acknowledges that the newspaper industry is declining, but is hopeful that they can come out of their slump.
He did not agree with Moonves about how the Internet should take money away from newspapers.
"Newspapers are still making some money, most of them. And Les, [...] I'm guessing your CBS nightly news still gets a fair amount of content from the journalists who work in these teetering places and the stories they produce. And you get to borrow it for free. What a deal for you."
The way Moonves expressed his opinion on print media did raise some eyebrows, but print newspapers are declining and online publications are steadily increasing.
A recent report from Scarborough Research shows the differences between print newspaper viewings and the viewing of both newspapers and online publications. The study shows that individuals tend to view a combination of print media and online publications more than just the print media.
For example, the Des Moines Register is shown as having 68% of viewers that either read or looked at the just the paper. The percentage rose to 70% for those that looked at print and the online site.
This percentage might not seem like it has a very strong effect, but it does show how online newspapers are increasing.
As we discussed in class, do we try to fight the online trend or embrace the "go-green" approach that society is undertaking? There is no clear answer yet, but society will eventually express what they want and give meaning to the people's voice.
By: Lexie Hagerty
I have always wanted to be a writer. I wanted to write a novel or articles for a magazine, both of which would feel like accomplishments worth achieving. The idea of holding my first completed book in my hands would be umbelievable to me.
However, recently I have changed my mind due to the easy ways in which a work is published. I am glad that writers can blog, write articles, and even publish their books online; however, I truly think that it diminishes the whole sense of accomplishment because it is easy.
By: Callie McBroom
Most of the news attention today is focused on tough economic problems for the country. Issues with personal finances that have a limited impact have now come alongside wide-spread concerns of failing financial institutions and insurance companies. Failure is not, however, limited to only financial institutions. We are also seeing some of these failures within the newspaper industry.
We all know that print newspapers have taken a substantial hit in recent years. Print revenues have been in a continuous downward spiral for years. This can be attributed to newspapers bringing in billions of dollars less every year in advertising revenues. Many newspapers are taking their news to online sources in hopes of finding revenue to balance out print sources. But even these revenues, according to Erick Schonfeld, were down 2.4 percent in the last year.
This could be turned around for newspapers soon because of a new platform just introduced by Yahoo. ATP brings the opportunity to publishers to sell into Yahoo local inventory and then brings several newspaper properties to national advertisers.
Newspapers are the first to have access to the new technology, which allows them to target advertisers and sell audience as opposed to section. Many are hoping that these new abilities will bring in revenue and save the future of newspapers.
by Peter Merchlewitz
Following my last blogs' theme of censorship, I found myself once again at David Lee's jBlog, and this time, he's not talking about cropping sections of a photo from a Middle East reporter, but this time, he tackles the topic of removing footage from video.
Peter Horrocks, head of the BBC newsroom, posted on the BBC Editors' Blog, commenting on the YouTube clip showing gunman Matti Juhnai Saari, stating:
"Our competitors chose to run the full footage of Matti Juhnai Saari issuing his threat 'You will die next', followed by him firing towards the camera and the explosion of pieces of fruit across the lens as his bullets found their target. The BBC chose only to run the verbal threat, but not the firing or the splattered fruit."
Well, that's all well and good...but the fact of the matter is, you lied. As it turns out, the BBC did end up showing the YouTube clip in its entirety. However, when the six o' clock news came on, the BBC had ended up censoring the clip. Is there even a valid reason as to why the BBC would want to edit the showing of the clip?
First off, news is news, no matter how graphic or violent it is. At least have the newscaster comment on the graphic nature of the video clip, and then offer viewer discretion. Secondly, wouldn't the YouTube clip be considered a terrorist act? By definition, terrorism is the act of using violence and threats to intimidate or coerce the public. So by that means, wouldn't the BBC be fueling terrorism by editing their broadcast of the shooting clip during their news?
The clips were shown, Mr. Horrcks, so why lie?
By Austin Bates
Recently, I stumbled across a small blog post that reminded me of one of my greatest pet peeves: incorrectly spelled, edited, punctuated, or otherwise written comments, forum, or blog posts. Of course, this also extends to news media and print media in general.
I'm a bit of an amateur blogger, as in I constantly post to discussion forums and group walls on Facebook. Some very contentious topics are brought up on occasion with some of the discussions, and though I may completely disagree with them, I respect their contributions, thoughts and opinions. That is, unless they misspell everything, have improper grammar, and no or limited punctuation.
Some of these people bring up good points, and frankly, they could have the secret to the meaning of life, but as far as I'm concerned, if they're not even willing to take an extra minute or two to spellcheck, use punctuation, and make sure that sentences read correctly, than I have to assume they're also that unwilling to check their facts and make logical arguments. Besides, as much as I want to take two minutes to read a 30 second post, I have more important things to do, including reading and responding to the posts of people who care about presenting a proper argument and have the decency to write correctly.
The same goes for professional print media. I can understand a simple word misspelling every 200 words or so, or an incorrect word-swap (for example, "their" instead of "there"), but if the publication is routinely using incorrect sentence structures, fallacies in their arguments, have dozens of words misspelled, and generally make the publication harder to read than it should be, I begin seriously questioning the legitimacy of the publication.
In terms of a newspaper, one must consider that there are supposed to be a slew of people looking over and working on one article, and if ALL of those people missed something, that calls into question their dedication to accuracy and just how factual their facts are. And a book with major errors is even more suspect, because of any lack of urgency or deadlines that must be met (in most cases).
Words are things that, once said or written, cannot be withdrawn or redone or corrected. It seems only logical then that one take even more caution with what one says and writes before it gets sent to the public. Making an incorrect product of manufacturing is one thing, but spouting a bunch of non-sense and typographically filled sentences damages, or even destroys, your reputation, and a reputation is not something easily repaired or rebuilt.
Besides, with all this modern technology, including spell-check, you would think that people would be better than ever at writing. That seems not to be the case, though. In the end, all I ask is that if you're going to post a response to what I, or anyone else, has to say, do yourself a favor, and those reading your response, and take time to spell and write it correctly. Then I'll take what you have to say more seriously.
By: Erin Floro
By: Kathryn Lisk
By: Jessica Hamell
Writers from the Los Angeles Times are suing ex-subscribers because they “failed to appreciate our bodacious journalism and recklessly canceled their subscriptions.” they are suing 425,000 of the ex-subscribers.
A piece of the lawsuit states, “By recklessly canceling their subscriptions, these morons have caused irreparable harm to the newspaper, breached their civic duty to stay fully informed, and missed some totally awesome articles by Pulitzer Prize-winning auto columnist Dan Neil, as well as money-saving Sunday coupons that could easily offset the subscription price.”
It isn’t fair to sue these people because they don’t know for sure what their reason for cancelling was. You can’t prove that every one of those 425,000 people cancelled just because they didn’t appreciate the writing.
Who would think of suing someone for not wanting to read your newspaper? If you have 425,000 people cancel their subscriptions you must be doing something wrong.
The lawsuit is seeking damages of $2.99 a week.
I am pretty sure this is a fake story because is comes from The Fake L.A. Times Web page. This somewhat shows that you can’t believe everything that is written.
This Web page has established itself as untrustworthy by the stories it writes which are just to amuse the readers.
By: Sarah Harl
Over the last few weeks, it has been no secret that the economy has encountered its most difficult stage since the Great Depression. It has caused a financial crisis of epic proportions. But one place where you won't find words of doom and despair is the printed pages of a newspaper.
Not wanting to cause panic or rash decisions by readers, journalists at many newspapers across the country have refrained from using language that would cause panic among their readers--words such as "crash" or "failure".
This is not to say that journalists are not accurately and harshly reporting on the shortcomings of many of the financial institutions in the US. Nor are they downplaying the current economic status of the country.
Instead, many journalists have consented to the fact that they are not, in fact, financial experts, and realizing the weight of some of the articles they write with everyday Americans.
It is the job of a journalist strictly to report the news and what is happening. Not to convince people to move around their money or pull out of the stock market. That job belongs to professionals who are frantically working to minimize the damage of this economic downfall.
A display of journalists remembering what their job is, as opposed to trying to offer advice they have no expertise in giving is refreshing, and will help to keep panic to a minimum. And if panic is kept to a minimum, we will be able to recover from this period of time hopefully on slightly worse for the wear.
By: Jessica Hartgers
A 37 year old woman has been arrested for allegedly having sex with a 15 year old boy. Shannon Rew of Indianola was turned into the police by her mother who was fed up with the whole situation, later Rew admitted to having romantic feelings for the boy.
Rew is being charged with 12 counts of third-degree sex abuse after having a sexual relationship with the boy that lasted approximately two months. Rew is also being charged with dissemination and exhibition of obscene material to minors and admitting minors to premises where obscene material is exhibited.
The day after the Indianola police got the call from Rew's mother, the police and local news crews showed up at Rew's place of work which happens to be a day care in Indianola. In the background of several interviews held at the day care there are children playing outside on the playground. The news crews should have chosen a different location to use as a background for their interviews, young innocent children should not have been in the news at all.
In fact, the local news stations should not have even shown up at the day care. The 15 year old boy Rew was having sexual relations with was in no way connected to the day care, yet the journalists made it seem that way.
News reporters and journalists held out this major detail until the very end of the story to keep the viewers attention and to keep them tuned into their channel. The way the journalist reported this story on television was a sneaky way around the truth.
By: Kayla Miller
Of course, we all have a tendency to make sure we are up-to-date with the latest news of the celebrities. Especially those who are gay. I mean, of course, it is juicy gossip when you hear that Clay Aiken came "out of the closet" to People Magazine.
I can hear it already, friend to friend, "Did you know that Clay Aiken is gay and has a baby?" Most people had a clue about his sexuality way back from when he won American Idol. But now it is finally real news when it comes out into the public and makes the topic of conversations.
How does the media know what kind of stories bring in viewers? Do they ever think that they are invading Aiken's space? Well, by the looks of it, Aiken wanted people to know by saying, "I cannot raise a child to lie or hide things." And according to People Magazine, they wanted the world to know, too, because of course... gay news is great news.
By: Gabe Gilson
There are many newspapers out there for a college student to read. Of course, any student would like to read the local student published paper, or maybe the city run paper. As a college student, I cannot be sure how another student my age could read The Wall Street Journal for more than five minutes.
Over the past few weeks, I have tried and tried to keep up with the newspaper. It seems as if one would have to have multiple degrees from Harvard or Yale just to understand the topics of some of the articles.
And while not everything is that confusing, inapprehensive and downright befuddling, how can a newspaper come out without even a sports section? Is this not unconstitutional? Yes, this may be the business man’s paper but, would you not want to know a few scores here and there?
U.S.A. Today has become my favorite nationally published newspaper. When reading this particular publication, one can find out everything you ever needed to know in the sporting world as well as the news about the $100 billion tax break passed by the Senate, or about Clay Aiken coming out of the closet, or even information about business that The Wall Street Journal could provide.
So here is my proposal to The Wall Street Journal: make a daily edition of the paper entitled The Wall Street Journal for dummies. This is why it would work. The writers that would be hired could be just people that got C’s in college rather than A’s. The reading audience would be much larger because America has become stupid (watch Idiocracy anybody that argues). There could be an entire section that defines those hard vocabulary words in the big boy Wall Street Journal
of that day.
So why not Wall Street? Why not make my day and publish a newspaper for those who were not the valedictorians of their respective high schools. Hell, why not a paper for those who do not have to use spell checker to spell valedictorian? Just a thought.
By: Alex Jones
By: Kelsey Knutson
By Kellie Green
Governor Sarah Palin has been big news ever since Senator John McCain named her his Vice President running mate. The media keeps coming up with more news about her for citizens to read. However, when does it just become to much?
I know last week in my blog I talked about how I wanted more. Now I am contradicting myself. In going over an article in Journalism.org , I found an interesting story on Governor Palin. It was talking about Palin's religious views and how they can and might affect the votes.
We have heard almost anything and everything about Governor Palin but the media keeps coming up with more. I am not a support of Governor Sarah Palin but I still don't think that she should have things, like their religious views, strung out through the papers.
In the article, it talked about how a journalist reported in World Magazine about Palins views on religion and how she expresses them. Religion is a big thing in our country but is it what makes a person who they are?
Seeing all the stories being posted about Governor Palin I thought this was the most interesting because it is basically saying that her religion is what is going to swing people's votes. Which may be true. However, shouldn't our society be focusing on what she is wanting to change or do if she holds office.
By: Lexie Hagerty
In the campaign coverage index on Journalism.org, there was an article about how economics has become the new topic for the campaign. The article focuses on how it took a meltdown on Wall Street for anyone to notice that the candidate's views and ideas to help the economy might make or break their campaign.
I personally love the article and am glad someone has finally pointed out that the elections are getting off track.
It is not necessarily society's fault, however. Society learns of the elections through the media. The campaign article said that the Wall Street story is only the second time this year that an event other than the compaign emerged to the no. 1 topic of the week.
Thus, the media should quit focusing on Barack Obama's race and Sarah Palin's sex and instead inform our nation about important issues like the economy and the financial crisis that could take place.
By: Sara Crouse
Reporting today is about getting the facts fast. Its about getting the facts accurate though too. Breaking news is perhaps the hardest to get accurate, but reliable sources can be a reporter’s best option. One TV station, MTV, dedicated a show to getting the facts straight about new music.
Total Request Live, (TRL), is a commonly known MTV show that focuses on world-premier music videos and artist commentary on CD releases. How else would the public comprehend what the latest Miley Cyrus song is truly about? TRL provides fans with direct interviews to get the latest on Miley and many more A-list stars.
The show dedicates itself to not only showing the latest videos/interviews, but also the most popular ones. This concept of viewer voting was relatively ground breaking when TRL started 10 years ago. A viewer having the option to pick their Top 10 videos perhaps limits the public’s accessibility to a range of music though. What if the nightly news were done in the same format?
Instead, the American public relies on reporters to pick the Top 10 news stories of the day. Reporters are perhaps more credible than the everyday man in the street. Reporters strive to bring us ‘news’ and educate the public.
Whether TRL reporters are credible is debatable, but they have left an impression on the music world. The zany interviews with some of the past decade’s most famous celebrities are unforgettable. Such interviews have pushed viewers a step closer into the world of musicians.
With TRL’s recent cancellation, music lovers will have to decipher the best new music on their own. Reporters won’t be available to help us understand the latest love songs on the radio. We’ll have to become our own reporter.
As N’SYNC would have said 10 years ago, “Its tearin’ up my heart” that we’ll have to become conscious of our music tastes.
By: Shauna Agan
When visiting Lincoln High School in Des Moines, I came across a copy of The Railsplitter, a student-ran newspaper. I haven’t read this newspaper forever and wanted to see what was new at my former school, so I decided to pick up a newspaper.
From what I have been taught already, I saw a lot of things in the paper that can and should be changed in the writings, but of course these students may not have learned proper techniques to writing yet beings they are still in high school. What disturbed me, though, were the inaccuracies and contradictions in the sports section.
As a former softball player for Lincoln, I decided to look at the softball article wrapping up last season’s results. The article said, “A key highlight of the game was Junior Courtney Ghee’s three run homerun which made the final score 2-1”.
Correct me if I am wrong, but if Ghee hit a three run homer, shouldn’t the final score have been 3-1? A little bit of simple editing would have caught this mistake.
Next, I read an article about the varsity football team. The article said that the sophomore team last year had a record of 7-1. However, right after stating this, a quote from football player Devon Miller says, “Our sophomore year we went 0-8”.
Now, either the writer completely messed up the record of last year’s sophomore team, or he was referring to a different class and did not clarify the distinction to the readers.
While I understand that these students are still in high school and have a lot of room for improvement in their writing, the editor or even the teacher in charge should have caught these errors. Maybe a little extra time editing before sending the paper to print wouldn’t hurt.
By: Taylor Browning
As the economy takes a turn for the worse, everyone relies on newspapers, the Internet, and television to get their facts. Due to this reliance it would seem newspapers would be booming with profits, but in reality they are also at a downfall.
Companies are cutting back on advertisement spending in order to save money, which is taking away from newspaper's income. Along with the accessibility of the Internet, it is difficult for these newspapers to make back the money they are losing through empty advertisement space.
Newspapers are now subject to budget cuts as well as laying off employees due to their shortfall of money. Altering newspaper layouts and cutting out 'unnecessary columns' such as fashion and opinion columns to shorten their paper is becoming an alternative to help money issues.
While insurance and banking companies are receiving billions of dollars in loans to keep afloat, many other niches of businesses are not receiving the financial help they may need. Newspapers are the ones informing us about the economic turmoil, while feeling the burn they initially report about.
By: Adrian Aitken
Web logging is a trend which spread through the country like wildfire. Anyone can do it from anywhere in the world and can also be viewed by anyone everywhere. Today though what is the point?
True many blogs give exclusive information about items people care about yet countless more don't. Finally the fire has reached the tops of the trees and the celebrities have joined the blogger's ranks. Paris Hilton for instance has recently posted about her latest promotional trip to Europe. This really seems unnecessary and distracting in the media world.
On the other hand not all celebrity blogs are bad. Bono for instance has recently started a new posting. It is not filled with which shirt he decided to buy today, but rather the post informs people of an international peace conference from an inside reporters view.
Blogs need to have a purpose beyond random tidbits of useless information and more regulation. Now I'm certainly not saying blocking people from blogging, but separate it into different categories. For example, a blog about sports where a guarantee of seriousness in facts is present could be called a splogg.If everyone "Blogs" it will lose its meaning much like saying a word out loud over and over.
By: Katie Anthony
As a firm believe of "every negative holds a positive," I searched long and hard for the positive of the Wall Street misfortune.
The best I could come up with is that CNBC's website hit new heights of "abnormal" customer usage that Monday of the Wall Street crash. I suppose someone has to benefit, right?
The Wall Street drama brought a new number of "abnormal" (non-frequent) users to CNBC's website. Their new total of "abnormal" users reached to 1 million. Which is a 26 percent increase from the previous site's best.
Not only was the Wall Street trouble what helped CNBC hit a new peak, Tina Fey's "Saturday Night Live" Sarah Palin impression was posted on their other Website, which also made iTunes' rating soar as well as many people downloaded the Palin impression.
Within four days of the Fey video being posted on NBC, it had reached a new height of 5.7 million views, and it's still growing.
I think this shows that while a lot of people are concered with the issues on Wall Street and what the latest poll shows on the race for the office, many people are also taking a few minutes to lighten their day by laughing at the numerous puns throw to Palin from Fey.
If you haven't seen the impression yet, I urge you to catch up on Wall Street and follow up with a few laughs from Tina Fey as Sarah Palin.
By: Pat Tierney
This past week I had the opportunity to hit the McCain Palin campaign trail during their mid-west tour. One of their largest rallies, was right here in Iowa, at an airport hanger in Cedar Rapids.
Having a photography background really makes me key into the press pool photographers. This Cedar Rapids event was no different. The rally started off with the excited cheers of a couple thousand McCain and Palin supporters. After only 10 minutes though the domineer changed.
From the back corner, right in front of one of the largest media platforms, a girl jumped on a man's shoulders and started yelling in protest as Sen. McCain was giving his speech. Sen. McCain calmly ignored the taunting but the press did not.
As if wild wolves on a pack of sheep, all cameras focused on this girl. Photographers we're scrambling around the press area to get that "shot."
That "shot" was taken over and over again, as Sen. McCain tried to continue his speech. As I was standing there surrounded by press, my mind couldn't help but think about the media's obsession with conflict.
Time and time again the public has seen the headlines that scream about conflict. Conflict sells papers, it attacks viewers, and will get reader attention. Some may say that the protester at the McCain Palin rally was or wasn't the biggest news from the event. But there's no questions about it - that the media had it covered all over.
By: Sarah Keller
At our Simpsonian meeting last Monday a Simpson Alumni, who is now an editor for The Record Herold and Indianola Tribune, came and spoke to our class about his job and the world of journalism.
Something that he said which really stuck out in my mind was that today's papers are about 40 percent news and 60 percent advertisements. It used to be that news papers were about 50/50 or even 60 percent news and 40 percent advertisements. This statement just reinforces what we have talked about in class about the subject of a reader only giving a few seconds to an article, things in today's fast past society need to to be short and informative. One web site showing support of the statement that newspapers have more advertisements than news is the popular site slate.com, where there are advertisements on the top and the side margins
Another thing that the editor spoke of that I really enjoyed was regarding the subject of jobs in journalism. Many people in the classes have blogged about how it is impossible to get a job in journalism in the world today. However, according to the editor who spoke to our class last week, when his newspaper is looking for people to hire, they look for people with experience; but they also look for new young talented adults who can write stories well and fast. This could be any number of students in our class.
The last thing that the editor spoke of that I would like to share is about the importance of the inverted pyramid, which we have been discussing in class. He said that it is necessary to use the inverted pyramid about 90 percent of the time, and it is an important thing to know in the field of journalism.
It disappoints me a little bit that news in today's society has to be very short and to the point, and that there is more room for advertisements than news itself. But that is what society wants today, and I believe that journalist are doing a great job of meeting these requirements.
By: Hannah Pickett
In a recent entertainment article I read criticizing movie critics was journalistically interesting. The MSN writer was criticizing movie critics in general. Aren't movie critics just journalists who form opinions about blockbuster movies?
The MSN writer discusses three main criticisms of the movie critic profession.
1. They have the dream job--getting to see movies before everyone else. 2. The "geezer syndrome" saying that the current critics have been around since the beginning of time. She goes on to suggest that they shouldn't allow critics over the age of 30. 3. They have no respect for the superhero movies. 4. Lighten up. The writer thinks that movie critics need to realize they aren't criticizing Shakespeare, but rather modern writing and acting.
The MSN writer believes that we are the true movie critics-bloggers. Movie critics for print and broadcast are a thing of the past.
If a journalist specializing in criticizing movies' job is becoming obsolete, when will other journalism professions follow?
In a nutshell, the MSN writer thinks that because of her view of the average movie critic's age, movies don't get the reviews they deserve. Would this be considered age discrimination?
You think of age discrimination in the professions that are in the spotlight. A journalist to end his/her career at the age of 30 because they are considered "ancient" in the industry is insane. Movie critics are just journalists publishing their opinions on a film.
In the journalism world, how old is 'too old'?
By: Jessica Hartgers
Protesters heckle Sarah Palin, vice presidential candidate, in Cedar Rapids, IA while delivering a speech on Thursday.
Palin stood her ground during the verbal attack and waited for the protesters to be removed. McCain supporter and interpreter for the hearing impaired, Donna Carroll, said that the protests did not bother her either and agrees with their rights to speak their minds saying, "All I can say is, praise the Lord they can do that in this country, it's their right."
The protesters of this rally have the right to speak their mind, however the government has restrictions on political speech regarding time, place, and manner. These protesters violated this restriction and were removed for the event without punishment. After several minutes of protests, the rest of the crowd rallied behind Palin with shouts of "USA."
By Liz Tjaden
National Punctuation Day is just around the corner, so polish off your quotation marks and exclamation points and get ready to party!
Jeff Rubin, also known as the Punctuation Man (seriously, he has a cape and everything….) is the founder of National Punctuation Day that is celebrated on Sept. 24. His idea for this day started in 2004 as a clever way to remind professionals and business people about the importance of punctuation. He has turned this day into a way of helping children learn the importance of proper grammar and punctuation at an early age.
It also is a reminder that by not using the correct form of punctuation can cost your company millions of dollars. A Canadian company, Rogers Communications, misplaced a comma in one of its contracts, costing the company almost $2.13 million.
Whoops.
I am a “comma happy” writer who never really learned the correct way to use a comma. My rationale is, “When I feel there should be a comma, so be it!”
Thankfully, as an intelligent and resourceful journalism student, I can now rely on my “Working with Words” book and my “AP Stylebook” to bail me out of these sticky situations.
However, thanks to Rubin, we now have a reason to celebrate the nerds in all of us.
By: Katie Schaefer
I'm not talking about your facebook or how you feel for the day, but I'm talking about your social or celebrity status. Being a celebrity or someone with a higher status, can get you out of things that most regular people can't.
How many times has Lindsey Lohan and Britney Spears hit other cars or were out in the clubs underage? Just because of who they are, gets them out of trouble.
Kobe Bryant, a LA Lakers basketball player, was found innocent of rape because he is really rich and he paid the girl off. Well I guess I shouldn't say he paid the girl off because that was never disclosed, but it's an educated guess. Two former University of Iowa football players are not as lucky as Bryant was, though.
The football players have pleaded not guilty on the account of sexual assault. Due to the fact that the University has flaws in the way they handled the case, the players may get off anyways. The school didn't protect the alleged victim from people saying things to her about what happened that night, so the school is in a lot of trouble for that.
Another thing is that everyone has a right to a fair and speedy trial, so why has this trial taking over a year to take place? I realize some trials take a long time, but this one should have taken place by now. It happened in October of last year.
It's mostly just celebrities that we find getting off for things that most people get in a lot of trouble for. Being in Iowa, though, a good athlete at the University of Iowa is enough to keep you out of trouble sometimes.
By: Callie McBroom
The New York Times TV Decoder is reporting that MTV has cancelled the once very popular show "Total Request Live." The top-ten countdown for music videos, has been on the air for ten years now. Dave Sirulnick, the executive producer of TRL told the Associated Press that it feels like the right time to pause in order to celebrate and reward the last ten years.
"TRL" peaked just a year after it debuted with 757,000 people viewing the show daily, according to Nielson ratings. Ever since, the show has been losing ground slowly. MTV claims that the show is not permanently eliminated but just taking a breather.
Many current famous celerities got their first exposure on "TRL." Now, the television show is hoping that the same celebrities that helped make TRL a hit will come back for the final 2-hour special. The last show will air in November.
By: Allison McNeal
Free viewing of online news organizations may soon become non-existent to the public.
The Financial Times recently introduced a new registration and subscription model to their Web site for daily viewers. This new method is trying to show that the media is not going to be free, like it has been in the past.
The Internet has been struggling to keep up with other media organizations because these companies have subscribers and funding from large corporations. With more and more large companies buying advertisements on media programs, the Internet is falling behind and has little, if any, money to support itself.
Since 2005, many Web sites have tried to turn their slump around and impliment a plan of charging customers. According to webmarketinggroup.co.uk, a survey conducted by "the UK Association of Online Publishers, showed that 63% of their members charge for online magazine content, up 5% from 2004".
Even though this survey was taken in England, it shows how the Internet is slowly gaining subscribers.
Advertising director, Rob Grimshaw, said that even though the Financial Times has more free subscribers than paying subscribers, revenue has grown from these non-paying users. Also, private corporations have also started helping out with the production of this new tactic.
This poses an interesting problem: How will these online media sources compete with other large corporations that lay a heavy hand on society?
Online newspapers and media sources will have to get out the word and keep pursuing other larger companies or privately owned corporations to help with the subscription process. Since there are many smaller corporations located around the world, they could influence these Web sites and give them a huge boost.
Individuals need to take this new subscription seriously and know that if they want to receive information online, they will need to start subscribing or paying to use these sites. Many people might not have a problem with subscribing to online media sites, especially if they do not subscribe to an actual newspaper.
With technology increasing each day, the general public will need to decide if online subscriptions will start to catch on or if they will get lost in cyberspace.
By Austin Bates
A lot of debate rages constantly about whether newspapers have any place in the future. Some think they do, but in more limited form. Others think they may have little to no future at all. I have to believe they will survive.
Without a doubt, newspapers will change how they work, how they're distributed, how they're read, how they're formatted, and how popular they might be. But I do not believe that those neatly bundled collections of folded together recycled paper will go the way of the dinosaur. News outlets that own print newspapers will have some serious changes to make, but doing away with newspapers altogether may be too extreme, and end up alienating a lot of readers.
I am the kind of person that will ALWAYS enjoy the feel of a paper book in their hands much more than sitting stiffly in a mildly uncomfortable chair while I strain my eyes into a too bright monitor and have to wade through a miasma of links, information tags, and scroll bars in order to read the same thing. Besides, it's not like you can take a computer, even a laptop, everywhere you could a book. Same goes with newspapers; I think they're easier and more enjoyable to read.
I'll admit, I read most of my daily news online, mostly from MSN. However, I get my news from there when I'm in a hurry or doing something else and something just catches my eye. When I'm trying to relax, and have time to do so, though, I enjoy opening a newspaper and casually scanning through the pages for interesting pieces of information.
Now, of course, many of newspapers's most faithful readers will be older generations, especially those that have yet to figure out how a computer mouse works, and, objectively, it is wise to worry less about them than the future generation, where your money will be coming from. But losing print newspapers altogether could still end up costing newspapers a good chunk of change and might not even solve all their problems anyway.
I believe that in the future, the print newspaper will become more of an elective novelty type item, more like a novel, than a needed source of news. More likely, newspapers will become weeklies only, serving to wrap up, in detail, the major stories and events of the week on Sunday, the source of most revenue for print papers. For daily news, readers will know to turn to the Internet, and this will most likely be automated through small fee subscriptions that automatically send the daily issue of the newspaper to your inbox every morning.
Newsprint has a long way to go before it ever really dies, and I do not believe that day is anytime soon.
By: Kathryn Lisk
While the presidential polls between candidates have leveled out since the Republican National Convention, Sarah Palin is still attracting quite a bit of media attention.
With so many controversial issues surrounding Gov. Palin, including her pregnant 17-year-old daughter, her 5-month-old, disabled son, and the fact that she is a woman who will be on the final presidential ballot, the media is still having a field day.
It could be that Americans still don't know enough about Palin, since she was an unexpected vice presidential candidate for the Republican Party. Or it could be that she has more baggage than Joe Biden does. Regardless, everywhere I look, whether it's on newspaper Web sites, magazine covers, or blog sites for my BNR entry, Sarah Palin dominates.
Palin is mentioned in a story in The New York Times because she drew 4.9 million people to one of Fox News' shows on Wednesday night.
The Huffington Post covered a story about how an unknown group hacked into her Yahoo e-mail account and posted her personal e-mails onto Wikipedia.
Finally, all three newspaper Web sites I checked, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and the Des Moines Register, each have a story involving Palin on their home page.
As someone who is very interested and informed in politics, I have been equally intrigued by Sarah Palin. It's important to know what she stands for and her political experience.
But I've hit my limit. I know more about Palin than I need to and the media needs a new story.
by Peter Merchlewitz
I know that there are people afraid of change. Some people believe that the old ways are best. Or in the words of one of my favorite musicals: "Tradition!". Dave Lee's jBlog reports the feelings of Middle East reporter Robert Fisk, who believes that the new age of internet blogging is crippling the quality of news writing. "To hell with the web. It's got no responsibility." said Fisk after being challenged about a quote whom the caller stated that he "...read it on the Internet."
Lee comes to the defense of blogging by reminding journalists what it is that we try to accomplish: to inform, educate, and and apply a sense of public voice. He even goes a step further, talking about an image shown in one of Fisk's articles, one of a man holding his dead daughter whose bones were protruding from her legs. However, due to traditional news reporting mediums, part of the picture was cropped, cutting the daughter off just below the bone, thus changing the caption of the photo "A man carries his wounded daughter."', ergo, completely changes the initial impact that the image presents.
Had Fisk actually given this new fangled thing called blogging a try, he might have realized that he would have been able to post the entire image, instead of just most of it. But not only that, blogs are becoming more and more popular source of news information, when compared to ABC's figures of people who read the news paper.
Some people say that without tradition, our lives would be as shaky as a fiddler on a roof. One of these days, that fiddler might fall and break his neck. And when that day occurs, make a picture, and make sure you post it on your blog.
by Sarah Keller
My blog last week was about a small paper that was not utilizing their web site and resources properly, but this week I would like to blog about journalists who are using their tools and congratulate them for being resourceful.
As been discussed on various people’s blog entries from the classes, the world of journalism is being turned toward the internet. There is more and more blogging being done, and mostly all newspapers have a web site in today’s society, even small colleges like Simpson have web sites for their papers. Since the dynamic of journalism seems to be shifting toward the web I have to applaud sites such as abc news.
The home page of abc news is probably my favorite web site to check for daily news, I am there at least once a day and I have to say that they are doing a great job of keeping the world updated on top news stories. They are using the things that we have discussed in class as being important for journalists today. They do a great job with their photography; every good journalist needs to have the ability to take good pictures. The abc network also updates their articles throughout the day portraying the immediacy element of journalism. On top of all of that abc also has videos to watch and not just from abc news channels they also give you the opportunity to watch news broadcasts from shows such as 20/20, Good morning America, Primetime, and more.
Not only is abc on top of their game these days but sites such as cnn.com and google news are also going along with what society is craving. They are staying on top of things and making great news with pictures, updates and video clips.
I have to salute abc news, and other popular web sites for their commitment to making their web sites the best they can be, updating the world daily, and for drawing me in.
By: Jessica Hartgers
During a traffic stop Friday two citizens claim to have been mistreated by two Des Moines police officers. Des Moines residents Octavius Bonds and Erin Evans filled formal complaints with the department. The case is now under review.
I think it is a very interesting as to what angle the reporter takes on this case. A wide range of evidence and facts are being left out of the report in order to protect the two Des Moines police officers under investigation. If the situation had been turned around and the police officers were the ones being mistreated the content of this story would be much different.
The reporter waits until the near end of the story to mention that the Des Moines residents were African Americans, while both the police officers were Caucasian. Either the reporter didn't want to draw attention to the race issue on behalf of the police or he didn't want readers to stereotype the alleged victims.
By: Erin Floro
To some, Jon Stewart is just a comedian. To others, Jon Stewart is both a comedian and a journalist. Jon Stewart is the host of Comedy Central's The Daily Show and is known for his humor of mocking people and politics. He says he is just a comic but a lot of journalists disagree. Nathan Kasper, a Stewart fan said "I see him as a journalist first and a comedian second. When he's reporting the news, he's still reporting. He's just making it funny."
Depending on who you ask some think that "The Daily Show" is a "news" program and some think that it is a comedy show. With the 2008 election coming up, everyone is tuned in to his funny style of journalism because he is unbiased. Some people think he has an impact on how the election will turn out. This is the third presidential election in which Stewart has been at "The Daily Show."
In a survey ranked in the public's favorite journalist, he is in a five-way tie for fourth overall with Anderson Cooper, Dan Tarther, Tom Brokaw, and Brian Williams. Mike Connell a college student at the University of St.Thomas in St. Paul said "And he rips equally on both parties. I think it's hilarious."
Almost one in four adults aged 18 to 29 are informed about the election from watching "The Daily Show." Also, "The Daily Show" scored higher on a campaign knowlege test than news viewers and those who read the newspaper.
So, if you want to be informed about politics and want some humor at the same time, check out the famous journalist and comedian Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show."
By: Sarah Harl
Every day, 1.8 million people tune into Comedy Central's "The Daily Show with John Stewart". In comparison, 1.9 million people watch Fox News "Hannity and Colmes" show.
I know this question has been posed in this class before, but how much influence does John Stewart have in the wake of this upcoming election?
Stewart doesn't think much. During an interview earlier this year Stewart said that he felt no pressure to report all news stories, such as the Virginia Tech shootings.
But Stewart does report things like international news and politics. But as many citizen's interviewed pointed out, Stewart generally gives both parties the run around, getting a chuckle from both Democrats and Republicans alike.
I think that Stewart's witter banter provides a much needed relief for Americans in the heat of political races. By pointing out how ridiculous politics can sometimes be, Stewart gives a voice to the average American in a comedic and appreciated way.
As a sole source of news, "The Daily Show" provides an incomplete and uneducated view. But as a Pew Center research points out, you cannot understand all of the jokes Stewart makes without having a commanding knowledge of the news first.
So, Stewart isn't a journalist. He caters to a very specific crowd of news buffs who are looking for a break from the intensity of everyday news.
By: Jessica Hamell
The University of Iowa ran an ad in Sunday’s Cedar Rapids Gazette that was misleading . It showed Sophomore Jarryd Cole slam-dunking a ball and in a line on the ad, it says, “Jarryd Cole's thunderous dunk brought the Buckeyes to their knees and the sellout crowd inside Carver-Hawkeye Arena to their feet.” The problem, Jarryd Cole was injured for most of the season and never played again Ohio State.
The University claims that it is a fictional ad that is meant to sell tickets. This ad is trying to see something not advertise a dunk against the Buckeyes so what is the big deal. Businesses use lines to advertise their services all of the time that might not be true. University of Iowa was just trying to show something you could see if you buy season tickets
This ad also ran in the Des Moines Register on Sunday. It was not created by either newspaper so neither one are responsible for the fictitious ad.
As said by the gazette “In this case, Iowa dropped the ball.”
By: Gabe Gilson
A couple weeks ago, everybody’s favorite ESPN show SportsCenter decided to make a slight change in the morning. In order to cover more breaking news, the hour long broadcast went from replaying for several hours the broadcast taped in the early morning to going on live for four hours in the morning.
Good idea SportsCenter. Poor execution though.
SportsCenter has many full-time and part-time anchors on the show. Some anchors are obviously better than others. The morning anchors (more well-known as the ones that I have to put up with) have been disappointing in the way they deliver the highlights.
Josh Elliot and Hannah Storm are the two that most often show up on the television screen in the morning. If it were not for Elliot’s ability to save Storm when she cannot think of anything to say during a highlight, which is too often, I would have to get my sports news elsewhere.
Both Elliot and Storm have amazing resumes at sportscenter.com. However, after watching critically one of their live broadcasts, one may start to assume that Storm was either a first-timer on live television, never been to an actual live sporting game of any sort, or just graduated from the 8th grade.
Maybe, just maybe, Storm was not meant for the live broadcast and would do better in a taped atmosphere. SportsCenter has many brilliant anchors that have a certain flow with how they speak that is easy to follow. Scott Van Pelt, Steve Levy, Linda Cohn, and John Anderson could make a boring highlight into something you talk to your friends about the next day just by their delivery alone. People most certainly talk about Hannah Storm’s highlights the next day, but
sadly, for her, more in a negative way.
Or maybe it is just the fact that I grew up in the Kenny Mayne, Dan Patrick era of SportsCenter. When hearing those guys do their broadcasts, I might as well have been listening to a regular Daniel Tosh routine. Hearing people like Stuart Scott yell “BOO-YA” early in the morning gave you that extra kick to start the day. SportsCenter is too far removed from having comedians like Craig Kilborn do the show.
Hannah Storm might be excellent for a television show like The View, or any other show that the 18-35 year old male demographic would never turn on. But for SportsCenter, us guys in that demographic want some pizzazz when seeing how the Cubs did in the game that went into extra innings; some fluidity when hearing about the shootout with the Eagles and Cowboys; and most importantly, some humor when watching those Clipper highlights. ESPN, is this too much to ask?
By Kellie Green
Journalist are limited to write just enough for people to get the main information that the journalist is addressing but the journalist must be brief on what they say. What if this is not enough? What if the information that the journalist provides is not informing the reader of everything that they need to know?
I am referring to articles that just give you the basics and nothing else. While reading an article on CNN.com I came to the conclusion that I need more.
Journalists are taught to provide enough information to keep the reader interested. In the article 'Peace Corps temporarily out of Bolivia' that CNN.com put out recently it talks about how America has pulled the Peace Corps out and has sent them to Peru. There is no mention in the article about the Peace Corps members and how they are affected or if they were affected by anything that is happening in Bolivia.
Journalist should be limited to how much they put in an article but they should also give enough information out so people, like me who have friends in Bolivia with the Peace Corps, know exactly what is going on.
Limits on articles can cause lack of information for an article. Information is what makes and can break an article. The question is how do you know if it is to much or not. I guess that is what makes a good journalist.
By: Lexie Hagerty
I am a cheap customer. I will not buy jeans over $50 and will rarely buy a shirt over $20. However, when it comes to a good movie, I have no problem paying the full 10 to 20 dollars for it and I have no problem paying $1 for a song off iTunes.
Social Media released an article about the new legal ways to copy a DVD. It cites an article from PC Magazine about the "7 tools for ripping your DVD's." Basically, the cite helps customers copy and watch DVD's on their iPods and other sources.
This is not piracy, at least not yet. However, I am afraid that if customers can copy their DVD's and CD's to watch and listen to on any device, I am sure that they will find a way to completely cheat the system sooner or later.
There have all ready been many cases in which customers have downloaded music illegally. Why not movies as well?
By: Shauna Agan
While many people believe the media is accurate, or at least fairly accurate, many also believe a lot of truths are left out.
One group of people feels so strongly about these inaccuracies that they started a Web site about the accuracy in the media. Browsing this page, one could find many things this group of individuals believes to be inaccurate within the mainstream media.
Some allegations appear to have a basis of truth while some in fact are far-fetched.
One article I found interesting was titled “Obama Truth Campaign”. This article accuses the media of withholding information about Sen. Barack Obama because reporters are more interested in other things.
While I do not know if there is any truth behind these accusations, there is a phone number, address, and e-mail address listed in this article to try to gain readers’ support for the writer’s cause. There is also an advertisement at the side attempting to make readers believe Liberals say unmentionable things.
Although this Web site is probably not reliable, the name is ironic. The people who wrote this particular article are obviously a group of Conservatives who feel media takes a Liberal stance.
Internet sources in today’s society are said to be a source of media. Although this Web site may not be in the mainstream media, it is still a source that many people look to for information.
While accusing the mainstream of being biased and inaccurate, this article has also become biased to the opposite extreme. How can they accuse the other sources of being biased when they themselves are biased? Hypocrites.
By:Quinn Albrecht
Amidst the destruction of Hurricane Ike, one newspaper is still finding a way to stay in print. The Galveston Daily News lost its roof due to the hurricane last week, but is still ticking.
The Victoria Advocate is printing their stories for them and is also helping them deliver to shelters and homes alike. The paper is doing its best to keep its readers informed of all that is going on, with many different outlets.
A sister newspaper, The Herald-Zeitung, is letting the staff use their facilities to type up stories and edit them. The Galveston Daily News is yet to miss an edition, thanks to their help.
They are using a cell phone blog site called Twitter, and also they are posting all news on the website. This is a huge change from years past, when a situation like this would shut down a newspaper for a long time and keep readers in the dark.
They are utilizing technology to; first of all get in touch with the members of their staff to make sure they are all okay. Secondly they are using what they have to keep people up to date on the latest efforts and breakthroughs with Hurricane Ike.
Its seems that today we are forced to deal with larger problems than ever, but for the Galveston Daily News, these problems will never slow them down.
By: Adrian Aitken
In my last blog entry I reported on the new Google News Archive and its unveiling. Now after a week controversy and debate has sprouted.
Publishers have taken two sides on the program, either a way to boost revenues or finally die off and give up. Google is taking the stand that the new venture will bring newspapers into the twentieth century.
One of the specific conflicts the publishers have stressed is where the profit is going and how much-if any-money will they see? Because Google is a dominating and well established corporation the company will pay for the costs of digitizing the microfilm. This will allow for a steadier flow of income to the publishers.
The question of how the digitization of newspapers will affect journalism will not be answered until the program is in full swing and has had time to settle. Personally I believe if done right both the publishers can make a lot of money through subscriptions and the user friendly aspect of the website will attract many customers.
I will try to keep updated as this situation unfolds.
By: Christina Woldt
By: Katie Anthony
As a frequent YouTube user, this article really took me by shock. Sen. Lieberman (I-Conn.) made a point to YouTube saying that YouTube was too "too open to terrorist groups disseminating militant propaganda."
Lieberman specified his accusation by providing examples of videos that were actually marked with logos of the al-Qaeda along with other groups that work in conjunction with the al-Qaeda. However, to my complete shock, the company refused to remove these videos because they, "did not violate the Web site's guidelines against graphic violence or hate speech. "
In my opinion, when I think "al-Qaeda," I have a tendency to picture graphic violence given the circumstances on which Americans think of the al-Qaeda. Then again, that's just my opinion.
"YouTube was being used by Islamist terrorist organizations to recruit and train followers via the Internet and to incite terrorist attacks around the world, including right here in the United States," Lieberman said in a statement. "I expect these stronger community guidelines to decrease the number of videos on YouTube produced by al-Qaeda and affiliated Islamist terrorist organizations."
YouTube heavily relies on what's referred to as "community guidelines." Which, is just a fancy way of saying that they rely on the viewers to flag videos that the viewer deems as "inappropriate." That puts a large amount of faith in the "community" of YouTube.
Lieberman even took it a step further and wrote a letter to the official of Google (for those of you who don't know, Google owns YouTube) which resulted in a few of the videos being removed. Regretfully, however, the vast majority of the videos that Lieberman pointed out were not removed.
How does YouTube defend itself? By stating that, "while we respect and understand his[Lieberman's] views, YouTube encourages free speech and defends everyones right to express unpopular points of view."
I'm all for free speech and the right to express, but honestly, is the United States going to be at a higher risk for terrorist attacks due to YouTube?
By Austin Bates
It is journalism's duty to the American public to report on current, relevant, and meaningful events, in order to enlighten and keep the American public up-to-date about various news items. But is there a point when journalism can go too far, cross ethical lines, and face serious question and criticisms from the public about its tactics and methods? I believe there is, and at least a few others would agree.
I raise this question in the growing concerns of journalism's place in reporting on events like private funerals. Things like a funeral, unless it is advertised as a large, public event, should not be reported on live by reporters. While John Temple in his article argues that as long as the journalist reports in a unobtrusive manner, say from a secluded spot of the funeral, and does so respectfully, such actions should be fine.
However, I have to argue that even if the journalist is being as discreet as possible, someone is still bound to notice, especially if there are a number of people attending. From my personal viewpoint, if I saw someone reporting live from a funeral, I would be disgusted. And while Temple says the reporters who work with him never enter a funeral without prior permission, I can't imagine all journalists might follow that code.
Funerals are supposed to be solemn, respectful events, and if private, they are supposed to be private, secluded from the public's prying eye and questions and criticisms.
I do believe, however, that reporters should be able to attend a private funeral, if allowed, and take notes quietly, and then write a report on the event later. I see nothing wrong with this approach; the public would still get their story and information, and the funeral goers would get their peace and respect.
I can't help but also raise the question of whether technology has anything to do with the increasing attendance of journalists to otherwise private or off limit events, that they would never have covered before. With the advent of smaller, more advanced, and more connected devices, it makes it much easier for journalists to be places they might not be allowed to be at, or should be at. With better gadgets, journalists seem to increasingly going past boundaries they should not cross.
In any case, I believe journalism should be free to cover most of what it wants, how it wants; after all, this is the very premise of journalism and its duty to the American public. But some events and places should be off limits, such as private funerals. Besides, what ever happened to "rest in peace"?
By: Liz Tjaden
Heavy rains and strong winds will not scare some brave journalists from getting the story. Hurricane Ike is sweeping across the southern coast of the United States and is also affecting other parts of the country. Many people have been evacuated from their homes and Ike has created massive flooding and damage.
Thank you CNN.com for throwing your reporters into the middle of the action so I, a girl from Iowa who is hundreds of miles away, can feel like I’m right there too!
CNN.com has a lot of videos posted on their Web site from reporters to the average Joe taking pictures with his camera phone. There is such a wide variety of videos from streets flooded out, homes destroyed by falling branches and from my personal favorite, what I like to call, the suckers.
These are the poor saps that are standing in the middle of the wind and rain determined to provide an eye catching and thrilling story.
I think, someone needs to tell the suckers how ridiculous they look being blown over.
The real question is, is this news? Now obviously, the hurricane and the damaged it has caused for people is real news. But modern technology can tell us the force of an impending hurricane. Do we need to jeopardize an underpaid reporter’s life to sensationalize an event like this? I found myself watching video clips on CNN.com of reporters standing in the rain and wind, no longer concerned about the effects of the hurricane but entertained by the reporters’ antics of training to remain upright in 100 mph gusts.
By now you may be asking yourself, “Liz, I thought you just blogged last week about how important it was for journalists to go after the story, even if that means harm.” Guilty as charged.
I did say that and I still stand by it. However, I believe there is a difference between jail and a few bruises versus being mauled in the face by a tree trunk or road sign. It is a thin line to cross but it comes down to everyone asking themselves when too much is simply too much. You couldn’t pay me enough to stand in a hurricane for a two minute video to be posted and watched by people who just want to see me fall on my ass by the strength of the wind. But I would research and dig and investigate any story I felt had a true impact on our lives even if that meant going to jail.
By: Katie Anthony
I'm not sure about all of you guys, but I definitely find it heartily discouraging that the media is so negative. For the longest time, I thought that I was the only one feeling that way. Little did I know-I was really wrong.
"Stop obsessing about the depressing industry news on Romenesko and open your eyes to all of the amazing stories out there." That quote is from an article written by Beth Macy of the American Journalism Review. It caught my eye since Romenesko is so noted in class about the news it provides. Macy seemed to be on a journey to find the optimism in journalism.
Soon, one person in agreement with me, became two. Macy met Sam Roberts who's story, I found to be extremely hopeful in the case of columnists.
Roberts talks about his experience with being a columnist, and describes it, so sullenly as this, "Of all the jobs I've had at newspapers, being a columnist was probably the least beneficial to my mental health. If you counted all the time I spent worrying about my next column, I made about a dollar an hour."
I found that to be extremely discouraging as an aspiring columnist myself, but nevertheless, I read on.
And two becomes three. Roberts soon encounters Regina Brett, who seems to share his opinion on being a columnist-or so it seems.
Brett, yes, is a very hardworking columnist, but not in the way that Roberts expected. She doesn't ask permission from her editor when it comes to what to write about it, she's extremely organized, and she starts every week with a minimum of six column ideas.
One day, Brett finds herself buying ice cream when she gets lost on her way to an interview (an interview that she was planning on basing her column for the week around), and she asks the teenage African American that served her ice cream, what his plans for school are. He, regretfully, informs her that he wanted to go to a private school to begin his medical career but that he couldn't afford it.
That was it. Brett was sold. This young man would be her column for the week.
Brett calls it that "familiar tug," that had her writing her column. One of her readers felt that tug too. Her reader convinced her husband (who, coincidentally, was a brain surgeon) to allow this young man to shadow him during a brain surgery. In the end, this young man's choice of private school, was paying for his tuition.
Why did I choose this as my blog posting? For, ironically enough, the same reason I chose my last blog entry. There was one quote (or, in this case, two) that stood out to me, and gave me hope that all is not lost when it comes to the journalistic world.
One of the quotes I'm referring to, is said by Roberts. "Being reporters, we're paid to basically get a graduate education in whatever we're interested in! We should be out there all the time, just jumping into the things that make us curious."
And the other one, said by Brett in regards to her opinion on the negativity of journalism today, sums up why I chose to write this particular blog. "We've got the best seat on the Titanic," she says. "And you know what? The band kept playing while the ship went down. That's our job in this — to be the band; to uplift people even as the ship's going down."
So, maybe you don't think that this article focuses on "the news about the news." But, I on the other hand, find the articles that inspire and motivate the young journalists to keep pushing through and excel, to, ultimately, be "the news about the news."
By: Kelsey Knutson
© Blogger template On The Road by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009
Back to TOP
