After reading Poynter's debate I can definitely see the clear conflict regarding Missourian article.
I definitely agree with Poynter's agrument, but unlike Poynter I believe there IS such a thing as unintentional plagiarsm. I know as a journalism student I am still learning many things about what I can and cannot do, what is ethical, and what not. So to me although I feel there should be some punishment as this was clearly wrongdoing, I believe it is an eye opening to many professors and institutions that there is still some miscommunication and disjoint in teaching students the role of a GOOD journalist.
However, I do think it was important for them to address the matter and set an example for other journalism students to follow because credibility is fragile. If they had left the matter alone, it would have shown students that they too can get away with doing it too.
Reading the last story, in response to the Poynter article, I felt compelled to support John Merril's side of the story. The media has glorified this story and ruined his reputation as a journalist without considering the other sides of the story. The fact that he has been a respectable and credible journalist for the paper for many years lends evidence to the fact that he was simply being careless.
In truth how many times have we been careless in our lives? Thousands of times, thats how we loose our keys, fall on ice, or in this case, make wrong decisions. So to me I agree with Miller that this instance may not have been necessarily unethical but rather technical.
I'm not really sure if the Missourian made the right choice to fire Miller, but what I do know is I'm sure this a common practice and if he should get fired, so should many others.
In addition to this I believe if he had no recognized his mistake and apologized, it would also have been a very different story. By doing so he recognizes his stature as a jounalist and that one must be completely honest to their audience. By admitting and apologizing for his faults, Miller took appropriate and professional action.
Although this is all very complicared, this story scared me more than anything. We as journalists hold a lot of power. And to be honest if I had not been overlyconscious and wary of this, I probably would have made the same mistake somewhere down the road unknowingly. Obviously, I am now aware of what can happen, and will never plagiarize, but to be honest I hadn't known that what Miller did was plagiraism. In fact, I have never done it simply because I didn't really know 100 percent if it was acceptable or not so I never did it because I would never risk that. So I'm glad I know now.
It's too bad this had to happen, but it just goes to show that you have to be on your feet constantly as a journalist, and you can't take short cuts. I'm sure many people learned their lesson after reading this.
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
A Mosh Posh Closure
According to Fox News (yes I don't discriminate my news sources!!) Mitt Romney will deliver a speech tommorrow on religions place in U.S. politics. Apparently this is his first attempt at confronting questions about his Mormon faith as he is currently "trying to convince voters Mormonism is not a reason to avoid his candidacy."
His speech titled "Faith in America" should be a huge make or break moment for his Presidential Republican nomination. Although his campaign stresses the fact that the speech is NOT a response to slipping in the polls, Romney said it is an issue he is forced to confront.
Although to many people this may not seem like a big deal, it will in large part determine his loyalties and the number of supporters. However, if it turns into just another campaign speech, it will backfire on his ability to gain voters and solifiy his position as a candidate for the White House. Goodluck to him!
In other news Hilary Clinton's presidential campaign coordinator in Iowa has now resigned. After forwarding a chain e-mail that suggested Democratic nominee Barack Obama was a "Muslim who wanted to destroy the United States by being elected to its highest office."
This was very disturbing to me. Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ and has NEVER been a Muslim. I am very happy though that Clinton's campaign manager asked for her resignation immediately. She said "There is no place in our campaign, or any campaign, for this kind of politics."
Although this is very upsetting that people will go so low so as to stoop and use slander in such a degrading way, I am glad someone agrees in "clean politics" and righteously weeded out the unethical and dirty work going on behind the scene. There is no need for it. And for someone to try to damage another's reputation in such a way is completely appalling. It reminds me that some members of our country have no class.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j4w4BzRKRNaOdwsYTZ2LN9pzYDIwD8TBLQA80
Switching gears back to Republican matters... according to an LA Times poll, Rudolph Giuliani is barely keeping his lead with Mike Huckabee. Rudy's once dominant lead has been dramatically shortened in recent weeks.
People are speculating that the reason for the surge is the fact that social conservative voters in the Republican base have been looking for a candidate to rally behind all year, and they may have found their man.
Giuliani is currently leading with 23 percent, while Huckabee still trails by 17 percent. However according to News Day, just two months ago "Huckabee was a little more than a blur in Giuliani's rearview mirror."
Fred Thompson won 14 percent, John McCain has 11 percent and Mitt Romney is at 9 percent. It appears that no one is out of this race!!
After tracking the Presidential Campaign this past fall, for nearly 15 weeks, alot has developed. Polls have shifted reminding us that ANYTHING can happen. And more than that, scandals are erupting daily reminding us that as the Race continues, the politics will continue to get dirtier and dirtier.
Only time will tell what will happen with the White House. Goodluck everyone!
His speech titled "Faith in America" should be a huge make or break moment for his Presidential Republican nomination. Although his campaign stresses the fact that the speech is NOT a response to slipping in the polls, Romney said it is an issue he is forced to confront.
Although to many people this may not seem like a big deal, it will in large part determine his loyalties and the number of supporters. However, if it turns into just another campaign speech, it will backfire on his ability to gain voters and solifiy his position as a candidate for the White House. Goodluck to him!
In other news Hilary Clinton's presidential campaign coordinator in Iowa has now resigned. After forwarding a chain e-mail that suggested Democratic nominee Barack Obama was a "Muslim who wanted to destroy the United States by being elected to its highest office."
This was very disturbing to me. Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ and has NEVER been a Muslim. I am very happy though that Clinton's campaign manager asked for her resignation immediately. She said "There is no place in our campaign, or any campaign, for this kind of politics."
Although this is very upsetting that people will go so low so as to stoop and use slander in such a degrading way, I am glad someone agrees in "clean politics" and righteously weeded out the unethical and dirty work going on behind the scene. There is no need for it. And for someone to try to damage another's reputation in such a way is completely appalling. It reminds me that some members of our country have no class.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j4w4BzRKRNaOdwsYTZ2LN9pzYDIwD8TBLQA80
Switching gears back to Republican matters... according to an LA Times poll, Rudolph Giuliani is barely keeping his lead with Mike Huckabee. Rudy's once dominant lead has been dramatically shortened in recent weeks.
People are speculating that the reason for the surge is the fact that social conservative voters in the Republican base have been looking for a candidate to rally behind all year, and they may have found their man.
Giuliani is currently leading with 23 percent, while Huckabee still trails by 17 percent. However according to News Day, just two months ago "Huckabee was a little more than a blur in Giuliani's rearview mirror."
Fred Thompson won 14 percent, John McCain has 11 percent and Mitt Romney is at 9 percent. It appears that no one is out of this race!!
After tracking the Presidential Campaign this past fall, for nearly 15 weeks, alot has developed. Polls have shifted reminding us that ANYTHING can happen. And more than that, scandals are erupting daily reminding us that as the Race continues, the politics will continue to get dirtier and dirtier.
Only time will tell what will happen with the White House. Goodluck everyone!
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Technology Mania
I'm really excited to build an audio slideshow for our final. It was really cool to read the Poynter website and see how soundslides came into development and how they impact online journalism. Joe Weiss, the creator created the program so that he could be a better story teller. Because I love feature stories, I'm really psyched to try this out, thanks to Weiss!
I really liked how he talked about the challenges and pitfalls of an audio slideshow. It gives me a better idea and makes me feel more comfortable when going out and starting my own. I now know not to make it too long, or to try to cram in too many images. I know I have to pay attention to the fact that the audience attentions wavers. And most importantly, the images are key to telling the story. If you have a really great image you should let it tell the story and leave it up there a little bit longer for people to digest. But in the end the most important thing is not your photojournalism or your audiojournalism. It is about the STORY and using images as a vehicle to communicate that story.
I really liked the interview with Poynter!! It gave me some inspiration, I'm glad we got a chance to see it and hear his own words.
The tutorials were EXTREMELY helpful. I liked the step by step guides to using the various programs and although I am not using the program hands on right now, I am sure it will be an amazing reference when I actually go start the project. Because I basically knew nothing about ANY of the programs to begin with, this was a great introduction. It had really basic child-proof directions to both the simple and complex tasks that I want to use.
IMovie had cool tips on how to make a timeline, scroll credits for your movie, add themes and effects, and of course work with the audio and photos. The Garage Band tutorial was a great overview of how to create and edit digital audio. It demonstrated how to create music projects, record, and how to use filters and audio effects.
Reading these tutorials and reading about Joe Weiss made me really excited to start the project, so thanks for the information which really helped me to get inspired!!
I really liked how he talked about the challenges and pitfalls of an audio slideshow. It gives me a better idea and makes me feel more comfortable when going out and starting my own. I now know not to make it too long, or to try to cram in too many images. I know I have to pay attention to the fact that the audience attentions wavers. And most importantly, the images are key to telling the story. If you have a really great image you should let it tell the story and leave it up there a little bit longer for people to digest. But in the end the most important thing is not your photojournalism or your audiojournalism. It is about the STORY and using images as a vehicle to communicate that story.
I really liked the interview with Poynter!! It gave me some inspiration, I'm glad we got a chance to see it and hear his own words.
The tutorials were EXTREMELY helpful. I liked the step by step guides to using the various programs and although I am not using the program hands on right now, I am sure it will be an amazing reference when I actually go start the project. Because I basically knew nothing about ANY of the programs to begin with, this was a great introduction. It had really basic child-proof directions to both the simple and complex tasks that I want to use.
IMovie had cool tips on how to make a timeline, scroll credits for your movie, add themes and effects, and of course work with the audio and photos. The Garage Band tutorial was a great overview of how to create and edit digital audio. It demonstrated how to create music projects, record, and how to use filters and audio effects.
Reading these tutorials and reading about Joe Weiss made me really excited to start the project, so thanks for the information which really helped me to get inspired!!
Giuliani Raising Questions
According to CNN, Republican Presidential nominee Rudy Giuliaini has called a story raising questions about the accounting of his security expenses while he was major of New York. Last night Politico.com reported that city records show Giuliani billed New York City government offices for at least 30,000 dollars in security and travel costs on trips to the Hamptons in his last year of office!!!
Giuliani told CNN that he "thought the story was presented like a hit job." This would happen, right now. Perfect timing. The story broke two hours before his Republican debate! Although Giuliani denied doing anything wrong, he told CNN the expenses were perfectly appropriate.
I'm not really sure what side to take here. I'm not sure if he didn't think he would get caught and just developed a safety plan to counter the argument if in fact it ever did get leaked. However, because he was covered by police 24 hours a day since he essentially had various death threats, there could be some truth behind actually needing the money.
A former New York major and Giuliani campaign advisor Joe Lhota told CNN that the security costs "were allocated throughout the various divisions within the mayor's office." If this is true it lends evidence to the fact that maybe that money was legitimate and maybe he wasn't just hoarding it for himself?! However, it is a little discerning how Giuliani's office would not comment. I don't know if thats fishy or normal?
The New York Times lead infact reported how one political site actually ACCUSED "Giuliani of billing tens of thousands of dollars in travel expenses to little known city agencies as he was beginning an extramarital affair."
It is unsure whether these allocated travel expenses were intended to conceal expenses associated with his new relationship or for some accounting purpose. I guess it makes a big difference huh? Although it is ironic his "lady friend" did have a condominium in Long Island, because the documents say American Express Bills were used for hotel, gas and other costs in that area.
Interesting. I dont know what to believe.
This says a lot. Because it shows how the campaign trail has grown fierce and brutal. Anything and everything is getting reported to try to sway voters. It goes without saying that voters of course should have all this information, it is just funny to see the shift. We are no longer talking about policies and abortion issues. We are now digging for dirt.
In the coming weeks I'm curious because this story could develop further, and other dirty facts might arise on other candidates too. You gotta love the turmoil and gossip!! Whether its true or not, its definitely something to take into consideration when entering the polls next year!!
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/29/nyregion/29campaign.html?em&ex=1196485200&en=7645a09e7c9032c9&ei=5087%0A
Giuliani told CNN that he "thought the story was presented like a hit job." This would happen, right now. Perfect timing. The story broke two hours before his Republican debate! Although Giuliani denied doing anything wrong, he told CNN the expenses were perfectly appropriate.
I'm not really sure what side to take here. I'm not sure if he didn't think he would get caught and just developed a safety plan to counter the argument if in fact it ever did get leaked. However, because he was covered by police 24 hours a day since he essentially had various death threats, there could be some truth behind actually needing the money.
A former New York major and Giuliani campaign advisor Joe Lhota told CNN that the security costs "were allocated throughout the various divisions within the mayor's office." If this is true it lends evidence to the fact that maybe that money was legitimate and maybe he wasn't just hoarding it for himself?! However, it is a little discerning how Giuliani's office would not comment. I don't know if thats fishy or normal?
The New York Times lead infact reported how one political site actually ACCUSED "Giuliani of billing tens of thousands of dollars in travel expenses to little known city agencies as he was beginning an extramarital affair."
It is unsure whether these allocated travel expenses were intended to conceal expenses associated with his new relationship or for some accounting purpose. I guess it makes a big difference huh? Although it is ironic his "lady friend" did have a condominium in Long Island, because the documents say American Express Bills were used for hotel, gas and other costs in that area.
Interesting. I dont know what to believe.
This says a lot. Because it shows how the campaign trail has grown fierce and brutal. Anything and everything is getting reported to try to sway voters. It goes without saying that voters of course should have all this information, it is just funny to see the shift. We are no longer talking about policies and abortion issues. We are now digging for dirt.
In the coming weeks I'm curious because this story could develop further, and other dirty facts might arise on other candidates too. You gotta love the turmoil and gossip!! Whether its true or not, its definitely something to take into consideration when entering the polls next year!!
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/29/nyregion/29campaign.html?em&ex=1196485200&en=7645a09e7c9032c9&ei=5087%0A
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Ethics
In general ethical reasoning can take many forms.
Principal reasoning assumes that you are not acting ethically if you do something simply because you have been told to do it or because thats what everyone does. To help journalists make ethical decisions, ethicists have adapted a model or moral reasoning.
The Potter Box is a model that has four basic elements.
1. Appraising the situation - collect all the facts from a variety of sources.
2. Identifying values - consider your values, your community values, your news organizations values, and your nations values.
3. Appealing to ethical principles - look at the ethical decisions such as kant's categorical imperative.
4. Choosing loyalities - consider to who you owe a certain loyalty to such as your readers, your sources, and your organization.
Usually there is no one clear answer to an ethical dilemna but these elements of the Potter Box can help you make a decision effectively and quickly.
After reading the chapter I learned three guidelines of ethical problems.
1. Be free of obligations to anyone or to any interest but the truth.
2. Be fair
3. Remember good taste
The book then outlines some specific problems you could face, all of which I thought were really interesting:
*Deceit - For the absolutist, the answer is simple - never! But for the rest of us, the answer isn't so easy.
* Conflict of Interest- Reporting generally assumes that reporters start out with no point of view but you should determine what constitutes a conflict of interest.
* Friendship - Sometimes reporters get too close to their sources and sometimes that isn't too good.
*Payola- Journalists may not accept payment for writing a story from anyone other then their employment.
* Freebies- Most news organizations have rules against accepting freebies such as accepting gifts, so you should learn your code of conduct at your news organization.
* Checkbook journalism- Another problem for journalists is deciding if it is ethical to pay a source for an exclusive story.
* Participation in the news- You also should make sure to let your boss know which organizations you belong to incase you end up participating in the news.
*Advertising pressure - Advertising can sometimes dictate what must or must not be printed.
*Invasion of Privacy - Basically it comes down to a matter of ethics and the public's right to know. Is secrecy better than disclosure?
*Witholding information- As a journalist are you ever off duty? Sometimes the press witholds information to protect its reporters and to maintain acess to news sources.
* Plagiarism- No one wants you to use his or her work as if it were your own. So don't do it!
Principal reasoning assumes that you are not acting ethically if you do something simply because you have been told to do it or because thats what everyone does. To help journalists make ethical decisions, ethicists have adapted a model or moral reasoning.
The Potter Box is a model that has four basic elements.
1. Appraising the situation - collect all the facts from a variety of sources.
2. Identifying values - consider your values, your community values, your news organizations values, and your nations values.
3. Appealing to ethical principles - look at the ethical decisions such as kant's categorical imperative.
4. Choosing loyalities - consider to who you owe a certain loyalty to such as your readers, your sources, and your organization.
Usually there is no one clear answer to an ethical dilemna but these elements of the Potter Box can help you make a decision effectively and quickly.
After reading the chapter I learned three guidelines of ethical problems.
1. Be free of obligations to anyone or to any interest but the truth.
2. Be fair
3. Remember good taste
The book then outlines some specific problems you could face, all of which I thought were really interesting:
*Deceit - For the absolutist, the answer is simple - never! But for the rest of us, the answer isn't so easy.
* Conflict of Interest- Reporting generally assumes that reporters start out with no point of view but you should determine what constitutes a conflict of interest.
* Friendship - Sometimes reporters get too close to their sources and sometimes that isn't too good.
*Payola- Journalists may not accept payment for writing a story from anyone other then their employment.
* Freebies- Most news organizations have rules against accepting freebies such as accepting gifts, so you should learn your code of conduct at your news organization.
* Checkbook journalism- Another problem for journalists is deciding if it is ethical to pay a source for an exclusive story.
* Participation in the news- You also should make sure to let your boss know which organizations you belong to incase you end up participating in the news.
*Advertising pressure - Advertising can sometimes dictate what must or must not be printed.
*Invasion of Privacy - Basically it comes down to a matter of ethics and the public's right to know. Is secrecy better than disclosure?
*Witholding information- As a journalist are you ever off duty? Sometimes the press witholds information to protect its reporters and to maintain acess to news sources.
* Plagiarism- No one wants you to use his or her work as if it were your own. So don't do it!
The Pre-Debate Spin Begins
Well the Democratic debate in Las Vegas starts in less then THREE hours!!
At the last Democratic debate, Clinton's opponents attacked her issues of foreign policy and her reluctance to take a strong position on illegal immigrant driver's licenses. Since then the idea that the former first lady is the inevitable Democratic candidate has lost some of its luster, Clinton's chief strategist is trying to bring that back.
Without a doubt it is a big night for Clinton to try to fix her image and debate performance. Although the past few weeks have been rough for Clinton, she still has the lead. With her new slogan being "Turn up the Heat," all eyes will be on Clinton tonight.
The race in New Hampshire has tightened significantly. Iowa is virtually a three-way- tie. With stakes so high, its rather appropriate the debate occurs in one of the hottest, fast paced cities in the world.
The Times says that "the last debate began a new level of intensity in the Democratic contest." The Washington Post says that right now "the race is more fluid than it has been in months."
Those comments aren't an exaggeration. Advisors say that Clinton is now prepared to give yes-or-no answers to convey "forthrightness" and that she is prepared to point out inconsistencies in Mr. Edwards and Mr. Obama's positions.
The Silver State is securing the third in the nation primary but candidates of both parties have been spending a lot less time and money there than in Iowa, New Hampshire, and even South Carolina.
The Washington Post said that its still up in the air whether the placing of the primary in Nevada was a worthwhile effort. CNN said that apparently Nevada was chosen because of its growing Latino population and strong union force, among others. When it comes to the general election, Nevada is a very important state for the Democrats. And who knows, it could be an ideal proving ground.
President Bush won Nevada in 2000 and 2004 but the Democrats came close and hope to seal the deal next November. Moving up Nevada's Democratic status and holding a party-sanctioned deate in Vegas could pay off on Election day next year.
Among the issues of concern to Nevada voters are energy independence, nuclear waste storage, water resources, economic growth, homeland defense, and illegal immigration. I'm pretty excited to turn on the TV tonight and see some of these things coming up in the debate!!
I'm excited to see if Sen. Hillary Clinton keeps her lead over her rivals among Nevada Democratic caucus-goers (which was confirmed in a CNN poll.) But time will tell if Clinton can correct her last stumble at the previous deate in Philadelphia.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/14/debate.preview/?iref=mpstoryview
Clinton is in the hot seat tonight since the polls show her lead over Obama have narrowed since her last performance. John Edwards needs to be careful, and Barack Obama needs to step it up. It looks like the time to strike for both of them is tonight, so the debate will be the ultimate showdown!!
At the last Democratic debate, Clinton's opponents attacked her issues of foreign policy and her reluctance to take a strong position on illegal immigrant driver's licenses. Since then the idea that the former first lady is the inevitable Democratic candidate has lost some of its luster, Clinton's chief strategist is trying to bring that back.
Without a doubt it is a big night for Clinton to try to fix her image and debate performance. Although the past few weeks have been rough for Clinton, she still has the lead. With her new slogan being "Turn up the Heat," all eyes will be on Clinton tonight.
The race in New Hampshire has tightened significantly. Iowa is virtually a three-way- tie. With stakes so high, its rather appropriate the debate occurs in one of the hottest, fast paced cities in the world.
The Times says that "the last debate began a new level of intensity in the Democratic contest." The Washington Post says that right now "the race is more fluid than it has been in months."
Those comments aren't an exaggeration. Advisors say that Clinton is now prepared to give yes-or-no answers to convey "forthrightness" and that she is prepared to point out inconsistencies in Mr. Edwards and Mr. Obama's positions.
The Silver State is securing the third in the nation primary but candidates of both parties have been spending a lot less time and money there than in Iowa, New Hampshire, and even South Carolina.
The Washington Post said that its still up in the air whether the placing of the primary in Nevada was a worthwhile effort. CNN said that apparently Nevada was chosen because of its growing Latino population and strong union force, among others. When it comes to the general election, Nevada is a very important state for the Democrats. And who knows, it could be an ideal proving ground.
President Bush won Nevada in 2000 and 2004 but the Democrats came close and hope to seal the deal next November. Moving up Nevada's Democratic status and holding a party-sanctioned deate in Vegas could pay off on Election day next year.
Among the issues of concern to Nevada voters are energy independence, nuclear waste storage, water resources, economic growth, homeland defense, and illegal immigration. I'm pretty excited to turn on the TV tonight and see some of these things coming up in the debate!!
I'm excited to see if Sen. Hillary Clinton keeps her lead over her rivals among Nevada Democratic caucus-goers (which was confirmed in a CNN poll.) But time will tell if Clinton can correct her last stumble at the previous deate in Philadelphia.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/14/debate.preview/?iref=mpstoryview
Clinton is in the hot seat tonight since the polls show her lead over Obama have narrowed since her last performance. John Edwards needs to be careful, and Barack Obama needs to step it up. It looks like the time to strike for both of them is tonight, so the debate will be the ultimate showdown!!
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Writing News for Radio and Television
As an Assistant Producer for Newswatch, my job is pretty much to write the stories for the nightly live broadcast. So this chapter was pretty much a review for me however I did find some useful things!
I learned about the four criteria that distinguish radio and teleivion news from print news. I never really took the time to think about these things so this was pretty interesting! My goal is to emphasize timeliness above all other news values, information more than explanation, news with audio or visual impact, and people more than concepts.
However when it comes to actual writing I recieved some good advice, which I can probably start using in the newsroom next week!
- Emphasize immediacy (for example use the present tense as much as possible.)
- Use simple short sentences with active verbs
- Write so that your copy sounds good (use a conversational style.)
- Cut down adjectives and adverbs and the usage of the passive voice
- Condense and use tight phrasing (don't be too wordy!)
- Select your facts carefully because you don't have a whole lot of time to tell a story
- Be clear and precise because viewers can't go back over the copy to check what you said, they only hear it once
- Use nickle and dime words, don't look for synonyms, and don't be afraid to repeat words for reinforcement
- Try not to use figures of speech or too many numerical figures
Lastly, I learned about story structure. One of the most important things is that because viewers are often doing other things with the TV in the background, leads have to grab the readers attention. I also learned that lead-ins should generate interest, while wrap ups should give the story an ending.
The chapter also gave a good overview of how to prepare radio and television copy. The main jist? Make the copy easy for the newscaster to read and easy for the audience to understand!!
I'll save you the time but here are the best tips I received!
- Titles should always precede names so that listeners are better prepared to hear the name.
- Write out difficult names phonetically to help the newscaster.
- Try not to use abbrevations in copy because it is easier to read a word then decipher its real meaning.
- Don't use symbols because newscasters can read a word more easily then they can interpret a symbol.
- Write out small numbers, round off big numbers or statistics, and try to keep numbers in general to a minimum (per sentence) so it is easier to swallow.
- Stay away from using direct quotations because it is dificult to indicate to the reader what is a quote and what isn't (however if it is important, keep it short!)
- Less punctuation is good punctuation!
Although stations may vary in writing style and preparation of the copy, as I learned during Newswatch myself, it's pretty easy to pick things up once you practice!
I learned about the four criteria that distinguish radio and teleivion news from print news. I never really took the time to think about these things so this was pretty interesting! My goal is to emphasize timeliness above all other news values, information more than explanation, news with audio or visual impact, and people more than concepts.
However when it comes to actual writing I recieved some good advice, which I can probably start using in the newsroom next week!
- Emphasize immediacy (for example use the present tense as much as possible.)
- Use simple short sentences with active verbs
- Write so that your copy sounds good (use a conversational style.)
- Cut down adjectives and adverbs and the usage of the passive voice
- Condense and use tight phrasing (don't be too wordy!)
- Select your facts carefully because you don't have a whole lot of time to tell a story
- Be clear and precise because viewers can't go back over the copy to check what you said, they only hear it once
- Use nickle and dime words, don't look for synonyms, and don't be afraid to repeat words for reinforcement
- Try not to use figures of speech or too many numerical figures
Lastly, I learned about story structure. One of the most important things is that because viewers are often doing other things with the TV in the background, leads have to grab the readers attention. I also learned that lead-ins should generate interest, while wrap ups should give the story an ending.
The chapter also gave a good overview of how to prepare radio and television copy. The main jist? Make the copy easy for the newscaster to read and easy for the audience to understand!!
I'll save you the time but here are the best tips I received!
- Titles should always precede names so that listeners are better prepared to hear the name.
- Write out difficult names phonetically to help the newscaster.
- Try not to use abbrevations in copy because it is easier to read a word then decipher its real meaning.
- Don't use symbols because newscasters can read a word more easily then they can interpret a symbol.
- Write out small numbers, round off big numbers or statistics, and try to keep numbers in general to a minimum (per sentence) so it is easier to swallow.
- Stay away from using direct quotations because it is dificult to indicate to the reader what is a quote and what isn't (however if it is important, keep it short!)
- Less punctuation is good punctuation!
Although stations may vary in writing style and preparation of the copy, as I learned during Newswatch myself, it's pretty easy to pick things up once you practice!
Clinton Hits a Rough Patch
According to Reuters, Democratic presidential nominee Hilary Clinton has hit a rough patch on the road to the white house.
Although she remains firmly in the lead and there has been no indication of her national advantage being in any kind of jeopardy, her "less than sharp" debate performance has "given hope to her Democratic opponents and energized Republicans."
This is really interesting to me because if one debate can sway things this much, it shows a lot about the public and the voters out there right now. They really don't know WHO they want and are pretty shifty and shaky and could potentially change their mind at the drop of a hat. Voters don't seem to be too steadfast right now in supporting their candidates, I suppose they are just waiting to hear more from the candidates themselves rather than from reporters like us.
For example in Iowa, polls have shown that Clinton is basically in a dead heat with a narrow lead over Obama and Edwards. In addition to this her larger lead in New Hampshire has since diminished. It is obvious many Iowa voters are undecided on whom to support but Reuters suggested that a key issue for some is the fact that Clinton may have too much baggage.
I find it hard to believe supporters change their mind that quickly over ONE debate, I mean it seems a little preposterous to me actually, but hey that means the presidential candidates have their work cut out for them- to be on top of their game during every waking second. It almost seems sad because thats pretty impossible.
After reading the article I almost felt bad for Hilary because it seems that because she is the leading lady, people are getting nervous and putting her in the spotlight and on a pedestal waiting for her to slip and fall. ANY human being is going to have their down moments and maybe this was one of them for her.
Clinton even admitted that this was not her best week last week (as was evident after repeated attacks by Edwards and Obama during the Philadelphia debate.)
However, a USA Today/Gallop Poll found that she is STILL backed by 50 percent of Democrats and Democratic leaning Independents compared to Obama's 22 percent. Even though she has a TWENTY point lead over her closest competitor,a NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll said she would face a dead heat with Giuliani in the end.
In the end though, she may have slipped a LITTLE bit but Clinton has overcome a lot inside and outside the White House and I don't think its fair to base decisions on one night. She seems to be so far ahead that even though she may have hit a rough spot, it will be interesting to see if she can "weather the storm."
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0759557820071108?pageNumber=3
Although she remains firmly in the lead and there has been no indication of her national advantage being in any kind of jeopardy, her "less than sharp" debate performance has "given hope to her Democratic opponents and energized Republicans."
This is really interesting to me because if one debate can sway things this much, it shows a lot about the public and the voters out there right now. They really don't know WHO they want and are pretty shifty and shaky and could potentially change their mind at the drop of a hat. Voters don't seem to be too steadfast right now in supporting their candidates, I suppose they are just waiting to hear more from the candidates themselves rather than from reporters like us.
For example in Iowa, polls have shown that Clinton is basically in a dead heat with a narrow lead over Obama and Edwards. In addition to this her larger lead in New Hampshire has since diminished. It is obvious many Iowa voters are undecided on whom to support but Reuters suggested that a key issue for some is the fact that Clinton may have too much baggage.
I find it hard to believe supporters change their mind that quickly over ONE debate, I mean it seems a little preposterous to me actually, but hey that means the presidential candidates have their work cut out for them- to be on top of their game during every waking second. It almost seems sad because thats pretty impossible.
After reading the article I almost felt bad for Hilary because it seems that because she is the leading lady, people are getting nervous and putting her in the spotlight and on a pedestal waiting for her to slip and fall. ANY human being is going to have their down moments and maybe this was one of them for her.
Clinton even admitted that this was not her best week last week (as was evident after repeated attacks by Edwards and Obama during the Philadelphia debate.)
However, a USA Today/Gallop Poll found that she is STILL backed by 50 percent of Democrats and Democratic leaning Independents compared to Obama's 22 percent. Even though she has a TWENTY point lead over her closest competitor,a NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll said she would face a dead heat with Giuliani in the end.
In the end though, she may have slipped a LITTLE bit but Clinton has overcome a lot inside and outside the White House and I don't think its fair to base decisions on one night. She seems to be so far ahead that even though she may have hit a rough spot, it will be interesting to see if she can "weather the storm."
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0759557820071108?pageNumber=3
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Campaign 08 By the Numbers
According to an analyst on CBS News, Hilary Clinton is going to get the democratic presidential nomination UNLESS she does something seriously VERY wrong until the primaries. As far as the republican presidential nomination? It looks like its a two man race between Giuliani and Romney.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/opinion/main3440351.shtml
Although polls can be misleading, he did develop some interesting conclusions!! Even though some supporters of Edwards and Obama say that just because they aren't in the lead in October, it doesn't mean they can't win the nomination all together.
However, when considering Hilary's size of advantage, she has a lead double that of her closest competitor.
CNN's latest poll says Hilary is at 51%, Barack is at 21% and Edwards is at 15%. She is even ahead in all the polls in EVERY state.Could this mean we could have a WOMAN in the whitehouse!?!
In addition to this her support appears to be relatively solid. The CNN poll said, 64% of her supporters strongly favor her candidacy. In the past few months she has gained a growing advantage among young voters, college-educated women and upper income voters. Some voters in Obama's electoral base have even said they are shifting to Clinton.
Interesting... it seems like she must be doing SOMETHING right!
It seems that Obama has about 20-30% of voters to win over in order to catch up with his female rival because Edwards seems to be falling out of the runnings.
On the republican end, things are more close. It appears that Fred Thompson's candidacy hasn't really taken off yet. At this point, if he fails to win South Carolina, it will most likely become a two man race. It looks like the pressure is on!!
McCain appears to be lacking the money and the republican base to win. Meanwhile Giuliani appears to have the lead in the larger voting states such as Florida, California, and New York. According to the polls, Romney's support is far from solid as compared to those supporters backing Giuliani and McCaine. The only thing that could could really hurt Giuliani is if his rivals begin running negative ads against him.
Only time will tell what will happen, but things are starting to shape up early, and I'm getting pretty excited to think about having a lady in there and I'm getting pretty curious to see what will happen. Maybe we'll have a FIRST MAN?
Even though the polls are beginning to put Hilary and Giuliani in the boxing ring, these polls don't tell us TOO much other than the enormous gender gap that seems to be developing. Men favored Giuliani by 50-38%, while women favored Clinton by 58-33%.
Despite these conclusions, in the end I think Giuliani would be the strongest matchup for Clinton. In addition to this I think Clinton could truthfully take over the white house under one condition. If she can prove to the men of America she is strong enough to be the President of the United States, and if she can prove that she is friendly and not coldhearted. If she can be a tough, nice guy, I mean girl, then she could really make history.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/opinion/main3440351.shtml
Although polls can be misleading, he did develop some interesting conclusions!! Even though some supporters of Edwards and Obama say that just because they aren't in the lead in October, it doesn't mean they can't win the nomination all together.
However, when considering Hilary's size of advantage, she has a lead double that of her closest competitor.
CNN's latest poll says Hilary is at 51%, Barack is at 21% and Edwards is at 15%. She is even ahead in all the polls in EVERY state.Could this mean we could have a WOMAN in the whitehouse!?!
In addition to this her support appears to be relatively solid. The CNN poll said, 64% of her supporters strongly favor her candidacy. In the past few months she has gained a growing advantage among young voters, college-educated women and upper income voters. Some voters in Obama's electoral base have even said they are shifting to Clinton.
Interesting... it seems like she must be doing SOMETHING right!
It seems that Obama has about 20-30% of voters to win over in order to catch up with his female rival because Edwards seems to be falling out of the runnings.
On the republican end, things are more close. It appears that Fred Thompson's candidacy hasn't really taken off yet. At this point, if he fails to win South Carolina, it will most likely become a two man race. It looks like the pressure is on!!
McCain appears to be lacking the money and the republican base to win. Meanwhile Giuliani appears to have the lead in the larger voting states such as Florida, California, and New York. According to the polls, Romney's support is far from solid as compared to those supporters backing Giuliani and McCaine. The only thing that could could really hurt Giuliani is if his rivals begin running negative ads against him.
Only time will tell what will happen, but things are starting to shape up early, and I'm getting pretty excited to think about having a lady in there and I'm getting pretty curious to see what will happen. Maybe we'll have a FIRST MAN?
Even though the polls are beginning to put Hilary and Giuliani in the boxing ring, these polls don't tell us TOO much other than the enormous gender gap that seems to be developing. Men favored Giuliani by 50-38%, while women favored Clinton by 58-33%.
Despite these conclusions, in the end I think Giuliani would be the strongest matchup for Clinton. In addition to this I think Clinton could truthfully take over the white house under one condition. If she can prove to the men of America she is strong enough to be the President of the United States, and if she can prove that she is friendly and not coldhearted. If she can be a tough, nice guy, I mean girl, then she could really make history.
Investigative Reporting
I think it was really interesting to see the transformation and importance of intvestigative reporting in our society today. Once investigative reporting used to be flowered with muckrakers and now more so than ever they are carrying on that tradition and doing difficult, important work serving our society. Many decades later reporters still have the same committment to exposing and reforming corrupt situations and policies, but NOW we have an essential tool: the computer.
In this chapter I learned a lot about the process of investigative reporting. Usually it all starts with one small tip or a hunch. Then as the books says, its time to analyze, organize, and write the story.
Acting on suspicion you first form a hypothesis and then you set out to prove or disprove it. Then the actual investigative work proceeds in two stages. The first step is cleverly called the sniff, because you sniff around in search of a trail worth following. If you find one the second stage of a serious investigation begins!! If you think you have a story and you think you can actually GET that story then you follow the pursuit, which is supposed to be the exciting part, however it entails the most work :(
A few tips the book told me that seemed really helpful were: to stay organized, and then develop a plan to go over it with your editor. When carrying out the plan you want to allow for unexpected twists by being extremeeeely flexible. And most importantly analyze what you learn to figure out how it will help YOU understand your story.
I also learned that the importance of accuracy is understated, its basically the essential element. Inaccuracy leads to lawsuits, lost jobs, embarassment, and ruined reputations, and NO ONE wants that. AKA its a prettty big risk but it has BIG rewards, as seen from the watergate investigation.
Although good writing is key in journalism, some of these tips the book gave me explained that they are even more crucial in investigative reporting. I learned to make sure to get people into the story, keep it simple, tell the reader what your research actually means and to ultimately give solutions.
I also thought that although some of the tips involving sources were pretty obvious, they did offer some good insight. By talking to enemies, friends, losers, victims, police, experts, and people in trouble , you can cultivate sources that can make your story. However because they rarely want to be identified, and often change their mind, written sources are a valuable source as well.
By scouring public records such as property records, corporation records, and court records you can find the details and solid evidence you need for your story. Even though public records such as investigative files, bank records, credit checks, tax records, and past arrests are dull and sometimes confusing, they are able to explain things that people can not. In the end having both human and documentary sources are what investigative reporters need to write the story.
At the end of the chapter I had found that despite the material being REALLY dry, it made me see that even though investigative reporting is obviously important, it has its obstacles. The first obstacle is money because it is the most expensive kind of reporting and requires a lot of time. The second is staffing because most organizations are smaller and dont have the reporters to devote to such lengthy pieces. The third is a lack of courage because its intimidating to fish around in the dark asking questions about controversial issues.
It can even be a violent job, and many other pressures such as social and economic pressures can play a part, but utlimately investigative reporting is very important and pretty rewarding to you as a reporter and to the public and greater good as a whole.
In this chapter I learned a lot about the process of investigative reporting. Usually it all starts with one small tip or a hunch. Then as the books says, its time to analyze, organize, and write the story.
Acting on suspicion you first form a hypothesis and then you set out to prove or disprove it. Then the actual investigative work proceeds in two stages. The first step is cleverly called the sniff, because you sniff around in search of a trail worth following. If you find one the second stage of a serious investigation begins!! If you think you have a story and you think you can actually GET that story then you follow the pursuit, which is supposed to be the exciting part, however it entails the most work :(
A few tips the book told me that seemed really helpful were: to stay organized, and then develop a plan to go over it with your editor. When carrying out the plan you want to allow for unexpected twists by being extremeeeely flexible. And most importantly analyze what you learn to figure out how it will help YOU understand your story.
I also learned that the importance of accuracy is understated, its basically the essential element. Inaccuracy leads to lawsuits, lost jobs, embarassment, and ruined reputations, and NO ONE wants that. AKA its a prettty big risk but it has BIG rewards, as seen from the watergate investigation.
Although good writing is key in journalism, some of these tips the book gave me explained that they are even more crucial in investigative reporting. I learned to make sure to get people into the story, keep it simple, tell the reader what your research actually means and to ultimately give solutions.
I also thought that although some of the tips involving sources were pretty obvious, they did offer some good insight. By talking to enemies, friends, losers, victims, police, experts, and people in trouble , you can cultivate sources that can make your story. However because they rarely want to be identified, and often change their mind, written sources are a valuable source as well.
By scouring public records such as property records, corporation records, and court records you can find the details and solid evidence you need for your story. Even though public records such as investigative files, bank records, credit checks, tax records, and past arrests are dull and sometimes confusing, they are able to explain things that people can not. In the end having both human and documentary sources are what investigative reporters need to write the story.
At the end of the chapter I had found that despite the material being REALLY dry, it made me see that even though investigative reporting is obviously important, it has its obstacles. The first obstacle is money because it is the most expensive kind of reporting and requires a lot of time. The second is staffing because most organizations are smaller and dont have the reporters to devote to such lengthy pieces. The third is a lack of courage because its intimidating to fish around in the dark asking questions about controversial issues.
It can even be a violent job, and many other pressures such as social and economic pressures can play a part, but utlimately investigative reporting is very important and pretty rewarding to you as a reporter and to the public and greater good as a whole.
Friday, October 26, 2007
What the ?
First of all. I read two articles and I couldn't help but ask what the heck?
This week Republican candidate Mr. Romney "slipped" and accidentally called Obama, Osama. To me this is first of all inappropriate but to me it says a lot about Romney's character.
NO ONE should stoop that low so as to associate him as a terrorist. If he is doing this just to generate publicity or even gain political grounds, I think he made the wrong choice. It appears that Romney was simply jealous that he is ahead of him in the polls so he wants to try and get the public scared of him. Let's be mature here.
And, although he defended it as a slip of the tongue, he clearly meant to relay the message. As reported in the Telegraph, Romnney made a similar comment in July, "No to Obama, No to Osama, and No to Chelsea's Mama." GROW UP. He obviously shouldn't be president if he can't even respect and treat his competitiors appropriately.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/26/wobama126.xml
I agree with the Boston Globe!!! "MITT ROMNEY owes Obama an apology. It's as simple as that." Even if it WAS a simple slip of the tongue, he still owes his supporters an apology by saying it wasn't intended to be harmful.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/10/26/romneys_faux_pas/
Finally, SINCE WHEN IS CHENEY RELATED TO OBAMA?!
According to the Associated Press, Vice President Dick Cheney said he hasn't reached out to "Cousin Barack" Obama yet since reports that the two shared distant relatives.
I thought it was pretty interesting how he said he hadn't discussed it with him because he didn't know if it would help or hurt his campaign. That's pretty true, republicans and democrats could either love it or hate it.
This all seems a TAD TOO ODD!! Apparently they are eighth cousins once removed. It is kinda weird how the two haven't publically addressed it and how they seem to keep shrugging it off. But hey it is ironic!
INTERESTING NEWS WITH OBAMA!
This week Republican candidate Mr. Romney "slipped" and accidentally called Obama, Osama. To me this is first of all inappropriate but to me it says a lot about Romney's character.
NO ONE should stoop that low so as to associate him as a terrorist. If he is doing this just to generate publicity or even gain political grounds, I think he made the wrong choice. It appears that Romney was simply jealous that he is ahead of him in the polls so he wants to try and get the public scared of him. Let's be mature here.
And, although he defended it as a slip of the tongue, he clearly meant to relay the message. As reported in the Telegraph, Romnney made a similar comment in July, "No to Obama, No to Osama, and No to Chelsea's Mama." GROW UP. He obviously shouldn't be president if he can't even respect and treat his competitiors appropriately.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/26/wobama126.xml
I agree with the Boston Globe!!! "MITT ROMNEY owes Obama an apology. It's as simple as that." Even if it WAS a simple slip of the tongue, he still owes his supporters an apology by saying it wasn't intended to be harmful.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/10/26/romneys_faux_pas/
Finally, SINCE WHEN IS CHENEY RELATED TO OBAMA?!
According to the Associated Press, Vice President Dick Cheney said he hasn't reached out to "Cousin Barack" Obama yet since reports that the two shared distant relatives.
I thought it was pretty interesting how he said he hadn't discussed it with him because he didn't know if it would help or hurt his campaign. That's pretty true, republicans and democrats could either love it or hate it.
This all seems a TAD TOO ODD!! Apparently they are eighth cousins once removed. It is kinda weird how the two haven't publically addressed it and how they seem to keep shrugging it off. But hey it is ironic!
INTERESTING NEWS WITH OBAMA!
Covering the Beat- Covering the Courts
I learned tons of information in these chapters, alot of it might have been over my head and I may have to refer back to it if I have to cover a story but hey I got the jist!!
When covering criminal courts I learned there are 3 ways that a suspect can be charged with a crime. First there is your everyday arrest. Alright well its not realllly everyday that you get arrested but hey we're pretty familiar with that one. Secondly there is the grand jury indictment and thirdly a charged brought on by "information" which usually occurs in the majority of crime cases because there is no grand jury function. A hearing and arraignment ensue.
However what was most interesting to me in this chapter was that many conflicts are resolved by plea bargaining. I never knew how judges had enough time to handle all the cases but this makes sense. If defense lawyers try to resolve the problem and bargain before heading to trial, they can save time, effort and perhaps get their client a lesser sentence. This way judges can devote their time to more serious matters.
A sheepishly admit that until this chapter I didn't even know there was a difference between jail and prison. And I didn't know the difference in charges between a misdemeanor and a felony. Although they both may have a sentence of probabation, a misdemeanor has a maximum sentence where felonies have a minimum sentence of one year.
I didn't realize how much actually went on during the pre-trial proceedings!! Defense lawyers prepare their presentation and analyze and gather the evidence. The exchange of evidence between the two lawyers occurs here such as police reports, names of witnesses, photographs and lab results. Sounds like intense preparation!!
Without a doubt though, learning about the motions is where I found the most interesting stuff. As a journalist, if I follow the motions I will find a story. Many things can change in the court room that can give me a lead such as when courts question the jury selection, implement a gag orders, question mental competency,and issue new or dismiss old evidence or even all charges completely.
Even though the trial is the main event and will be my main story, it is advised that the reporter be aware of trial strategy,legal issues and human drama that might unfold. In the end though I learned I must become familiar with the different types of objections, follow the jury selection, be present during the opening statements, focus on the presentation of evidence, pay attention to the cross examination, take notes on the closing argument, and stick around for the juror's instruction on the law. More importantly you should be around for when the verdict has been reached and announced in court, interview the jurors at the conclusion of the case, and appear at the sentencing hearing. However, if you think your job ends there make sure there is no appeal process before you publish your story!
In general I learned that usuallllly civil court cases aren't that newsworthy... simply because there are thousands a year and the disputes involve no significant legal issues and are usually between little-known parties so they aren't of public interest. However these cases still help to shape our society and values. Usually society members seek justice on their own from everything like dogbites and wrongful deaths to child custody issues and legal malpractice. To me although these may seem boring, pretty much everything and anything could end up in court so it could be pretttty amusing!
A civil case begins with the filing of a complaint or a petition brought on by the victim directly. However usually it takes many years for the case to actually be brought to court and for the evidence to be collected. Because this process is so long, sometimes the case is settled before it even reaches the court. The lawsuits then typically unfold gradually. Even though there are a few differences, the rest of the trial proceeds very much like a criminal case with the presentation and defense of evidence and then the submition for a verdict. A settlement or an appeal may occur sometime afterwards.
Ultimately as a reporter we are generally looking to write a story on the evidence that is found during the discovery phase. This is where we can find some newsworthy information because overall it seems covering these types of court cases can be pretty bland.
Because there is SO much information on covering beats I will simply regurgitate the best tips and pieces of advice I recieved.
To be a successfuly beat reporter one should be prepared, alert, persistent, present, and wary. Get to know your beat, figure out the records, make notes, and learn the law! You should also start establishing a relationship with your sources, understand your editors expectations and talk to your predecessor to get some background. Don't ever give up until you get the answer and keep track of slow developing problems or projects incase they break one day. And always follow the money, the power and the politics.
Finally, some really good personal advice I got was to do favors when you can because as a reporter you are constantly asking for favors. Don't always fall into the trap that bad news is good news. Always protect your sources and above all be accurate.
Although there are many beats such as the police dept., government, schools, the courts, religion, the environment, science and medicine, the process when starting to cover a beat is the same: learn the language, research, and develop your sources.
When covering criminal courts I learned there are 3 ways that a suspect can be charged with a crime. First there is your everyday arrest. Alright well its not realllly everyday that you get arrested but hey we're pretty familiar with that one. Secondly there is the grand jury indictment and thirdly a charged brought on by "information" which usually occurs in the majority of crime cases because there is no grand jury function. A hearing and arraignment ensue.
However what was most interesting to me in this chapter was that many conflicts are resolved by plea bargaining. I never knew how judges had enough time to handle all the cases but this makes sense. If defense lawyers try to resolve the problem and bargain before heading to trial, they can save time, effort and perhaps get their client a lesser sentence. This way judges can devote their time to more serious matters.
A sheepishly admit that until this chapter I didn't even know there was a difference between jail and prison. And I didn't know the difference in charges between a misdemeanor and a felony. Although they both may have a sentence of probabation, a misdemeanor has a maximum sentence where felonies have a minimum sentence of one year.
I didn't realize how much actually went on during the pre-trial proceedings!! Defense lawyers prepare their presentation and analyze and gather the evidence. The exchange of evidence between the two lawyers occurs here such as police reports, names of witnesses, photographs and lab results. Sounds like intense preparation!!
Without a doubt though, learning about the motions is where I found the most interesting stuff. As a journalist, if I follow the motions I will find a story. Many things can change in the court room that can give me a lead such as when courts question the jury selection, implement a gag orders, question mental competency,and issue new or dismiss old evidence or even all charges completely.
Even though the trial is the main event and will be my main story, it is advised that the reporter be aware of trial strategy,legal issues and human drama that might unfold. In the end though I learned I must become familiar with the different types of objections, follow the jury selection, be present during the opening statements, focus on the presentation of evidence, pay attention to the cross examination, take notes on the closing argument, and stick around for the juror's instruction on the law. More importantly you should be around for when the verdict has been reached and announced in court, interview the jurors at the conclusion of the case, and appear at the sentencing hearing. However, if you think your job ends there make sure there is no appeal process before you publish your story!
In general I learned that usuallllly civil court cases aren't that newsworthy... simply because there are thousands a year and the disputes involve no significant legal issues and are usually between little-known parties so they aren't of public interest. However these cases still help to shape our society and values. Usually society members seek justice on their own from everything like dogbites and wrongful deaths to child custody issues and legal malpractice. To me although these may seem boring, pretty much everything and anything could end up in court so it could be pretttty amusing!
A civil case begins with the filing of a complaint or a petition brought on by the victim directly. However usually it takes many years for the case to actually be brought to court and for the evidence to be collected. Because this process is so long, sometimes the case is settled before it even reaches the court. The lawsuits then typically unfold gradually. Even though there are a few differences, the rest of the trial proceeds very much like a criminal case with the presentation and defense of evidence and then the submition for a verdict. A settlement or an appeal may occur sometime afterwards.
Ultimately as a reporter we are generally looking to write a story on the evidence that is found during the discovery phase. This is where we can find some newsworthy information because overall it seems covering these types of court cases can be pretty bland.
Because there is SO much information on covering beats I will simply regurgitate the best tips and pieces of advice I recieved.
To be a successfuly beat reporter one should be prepared, alert, persistent, present, and wary. Get to know your beat, figure out the records, make notes, and learn the law! You should also start establishing a relationship with your sources, understand your editors expectations and talk to your predecessor to get some background. Don't ever give up until you get the answer and keep track of slow developing problems or projects incase they break one day. And always follow the money, the power and the politics.
Finally, some really good personal advice I got was to do favors when you can because as a reporter you are constantly asking for favors. Don't always fall into the trap that bad news is good news. Always protect your sources and above all be accurate.
Although there are many beats such as the police dept., government, schools, the courts, religion, the environment, science and medicine, the process when starting to cover a beat is the same: learn the language, research, and develop your sources.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
I feel like I've been reading about crime for 827382 days...
One of the really cool things I got out of the eighty million chapters was how crime beats can be treasures to journalists. They offer such great stories and they usually have all the components viewers or readers want: greed, sex, violence, comedy, and tragedy. Crime reporters have to juggle many differents kinds of stories from fires to homicide so it's definitely a test of your character. The book even said that crime reporters are the busiest in the newsroom- quite interesting I thought. Without a doubt they GOT to be the most aggressive!! I also found it intriguing how society is so fascinated by crime. I'll admit the stories are more entertaining and attention grabbing.
Some of the tips I learned were to figure out how to distinguish robbery, burglary, larceny and theft. I learned some of the pressures of crime beat reporting and some ideas and tips to get myself started... if I ever felt the need to do this (which I do not believe will be the cases but nonetheless it was cool!!) I also learned some of the steps of prisoner processing, bail procedures and arraigment. This was really interesting to me because I write stories for newswatch and many of them often include a crime involving arrest and I finally know what some of the key terms reallllly mean... Now I have a better idea of what's actually going on!
I thought it was really telling how the author spelled out the fact that if you can't handle death, tragedy, conflict, and lawfullness get out because the crime beat will leave you"miserable." I know the crime beat isn't for me... thats for sure! I really liked how he included information about the crime reporter's demographics, job satisfaction, safety and job tunrover because it really humanized the fact that there are real people going out and covering these sometimes gruesome stories.
Finally from chapter one I really enjoyed how the crime beat issues were broken down. It really coincides with the fact that there are many ethical dilmenas reporters face when trying to determine what's important vs what's news. This really brought to my attention the fact that sometimes we give too much value to a crime story and we end up making them a famous celebrity, sort of like OJ Simpson. I think that's where we cross the line and it doesn't become tasteful any longer because people will just eat it up like some story straight out of Hollywood.
In chapter 5 for the majority I learned why we realllly cover crime stories. First of all its important to give society an overall view of the criminal justice system. Next we want to make sure people are aware of whats going on in their area so they can protect themselves. In general reporters want to inform, uncover problems, prevent crime and help victims. The job requires perspective, persistence, and patience and is easily one of the hardest jobsin the newsroom. For one you have to speak to various victims during their time of sadness or distress. You also must determine your actual motivation for the story to make sure you are giving the public information that is new, different, and helpful. After reading this chapter I really understood the seriousness and stresses crime reporters face with contacting and approaching victims and yet at the same time trying to do their job.
For the most part learned some really good tips for approaching crime victims at the scene, at their home, at the hospital, or over the phone. In general I learned to identify myself, and be cautious, appropriate, simple,sincere and respectful in order to establish rapport. Then I must explain my purpose and get interviewing. Other tips included doing your research, being available at all times for the source to contact you at their convenience, listen, and give interviewees time to formulate their thoughts. Lastly,make sure you are not too graphic and that you interview others to achieve objectivity, fairness and balance which afterall are the principles of solid journalism!
In my last chapter of reading (chaper7) I realized how little I knew. I knew that the law shaped and held our society together because they are responsible for a large part of American life ranging from issues such as taxes to abortion. I knew that the law controls how these things affect our lives but I didnt realize how crucial it was for reporters to translate the language of the rulings and decisions so that individuals like me could understand. In general the chapter discussed how the court system operates and how a reporter like me can go about doing their job and reporting on what occurs there.
Now I will sheepishly admit, alot of the terminology and discussion was over my head but hey I tried to wrap my head around it. I learned that the U.S. courts are organized by jurisdiction and function and that there are two basic court systems: federal and state. Within each court system there are different levels of function such as trials, intermediate appeals and fine appeals. Within these various court sytems there are two players. One group is the administrative personell who handles paperwork and proceedings. The other is the judges and juries who make decisions and bring criminal charges. I guess its obvious to say that the journalist who learns and understands the functions of these players will get the best coverage of the court beat!!
I really learned that covering the courts is Intimidating, with a capital I. You must listen, ask questions, be concise,be patient, be observant and above all, become knowledgable. I learned that court documents can and should be a reporter's best friend because it is most likely the most valuable source of information. They are libel proof, and they will not turn on you like a source. I also learned what sources to contact and which sources will give me the information I need. Also learned to make sure to cover the pre-trial hearings and rulings to understand how a case is progressing before it falls into place in the court room.
Some other tips the author give the reader were really basic but nonetheless helpful.When covering either a run-of-the mill case or a heater trial make sure you, listen to jury selection, pay close attention to opening statements, listen to cross-examination and develop some ground rules for speaking with the judge because they can be a key source for your beat.
I thought it was really interesting how the author said covering a trial is like covering a sports event- you got to know your players! Pretttty clever!
Overall the chapters were really intriguing even though they were a little dry. But hey now I'm ready to go out there and start my beat! wohoo!
Some of the tips I learned were to figure out how to distinguish robbery, burglary, larceny and theft. I learned some of the pressures of crime beat reporting and some ideas and tips to get myself started... if I ever felt the need to do this (which I do not believe will be the cases but nonetheless it was cool!!) I also learned some of the steps of prisoner processing, bail procedures and arraigment. This was really interesting to me because I write stories for newswatch and many of them often include a crime involving arrest and I finally know what some of the key terms reallllly mean... Now I have a better idea of what's actually going on!
I thought it was really telling how the author spelled out the fact that if you can't handle death, tragedy, conflict, and lawfullness get out because the crime beat will leave you"miserable." I know the crime beat isn't for me... thats for sure! I really liked how he included information about the crime reporter's demographics, job satisfaction, safety and job tunrover because it really humanized the fact that there are real people going out and covering these sometimes gruesome stories.
Finally from chapter one I really enjoyed how the crime beat issues were broken down. It really coincides with the fact that there are many ethical dilmenas reporters face when trying to determine what's important vs what's news. This really brought to my attention the fact that sometimes we give too much value to a crime story and we end up making them a famous celebrity, sort of like OJ Simpson. I think that's where we cross the line and it doesn't become tasteful any longer because people will just eat it up like some story straight out of Hollywood.
In chapter 5 for the majority I learned why we realllly cover crime stories. First of all its important to give society an overall view of the criminal justice system. Next we want to make sure people are aware of whats going on in their area so they can protect themselves. In general reporters want to inform, uncover problems, prevent crime and help victims. The job requires perspective, persistence, and patience and is easily one of the hardest jobsin the newsroom. For one you have to speak to various victims during their time of sadness or distress. You also must determine your actual motivation for the story to make sure you are giving the public information that is new, different, and helpful. After reading this chapter I really understood the seriousness and stresses crime reporters face with contacting and approaching victims and yet at the same time trying to do their job.
For the most part learned some really good tips for approaching crime victims at the scene, at their home, at the hospital, or over the phone. In general I learned to identify myself, and be cautious, appropriate, simple,sincere and respectful in order to establish rapport. Then I must explain my purpose and get interviewing. Other tips included doing your research, being available at all times for the source to contact you at their convenience, listen, and give interviewees time to formulate their thoughts. Lastly,make sure you are not too graphic and that you interview others to achieve objectivity, fairness and balance which afterall are the principles of solid journalism!
In my last chapter of reading (chaper7) I realized how little I knew. I knew that the law shaped and held our society together because they are responsible for a large part of American life ranging from issues such as taxes to abortion. I knew that the law controls how these things affect our lives but I didnt realize how crucial it was for reporters to translate the language of the rulings and decisions so that individuals like me could understand. In general the chapter discussed how the court system operates and how a reporter like me can go about doing their job and reporting on what occurs there.
Now I will sheepishly admit, alot of the terminology and discussion was over my head but hey I tried to wrap my head around it. I learned that the U.S. courts are organized by jurisdiction and function and that there are two basic court systems: federal and state. Within each court system there are different levels of function such as trials, intermediate appeals and fine appeals. Within these various court sytems there are two players. One group is the administrative personell who handles paperwork and proceedings. The other is the judges and juries who make decisions and bring criminal charges. I guess its obvious to say that the journalist who learns and understands the functions of these players will get the best coverage of the court beat!!
I really learned that covering the courts is Intimidating, with a capital I. You must listen, ask questions, be concise,be patient, be observant and above all, become knowledgable. I learned that court documents can and should be a reporter's best friend because it is most likely the most valuable source of information. They are libel proof, and they will not turn on you like a source. I also learned what sources to contact and which sources will give me the information I need. Also learned to make sure to cover the pre-trial hearings and rulings to understand how a case is progressing before it falls into place in the court room.
Some other tips the author give the reader were really basic but nonetheless helpful.When covering either a run-of-the mill case or a heater trial make sure you, listen to jury selection, pay close attention to opening statements, listen to cross-examination and develop some ground rules for speaking with the judge because they can be a key source for your beat.
I thought it was really interesting how the author said covering a trial is like covering a sports event- you got to know your players! Pretttty clever!
Overall the chapters were really intriguing even though they were a little dry. But hey now I'm ready to go out there and start my beat! wohoo!
Monday, October 15, 2007
My Comments!
Holly " Giuliani and his cell phone"
http://hollysmithnewsi.blogspot.com/2007/09/giuliani-and-his-cell-phone.html
Antonina " That's it i'm turning democrat"
http://ladyantoninakrystyna.blogspot.com/2007/10/thats-it-im-turning-republican.html
Marcus " Saturday, October 6, 2007"
http://pierulesyou.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2007-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2008-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=14
Devon " News Reporting and Writing 1 Untitled"
http://devonhaley.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-recently-saw-article-in-past-issue-of.html
Laura D " Hilary Clinton No Joke"
http://newsreportingandwriting.blogspot.com/2007/10/public-should-be-protected-from.html
Briana " Really.. what the fuck"
http://brianaword.blogspot.com/2007/10/reallywhat-fuck.html
Hannah " Election $$$"
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1262959131330397320&postID=1831312901532624614
Jen " Giuliani...um...9/11"
http://jenfursblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/giuliani-um-911.html
http://hollysmithnewsi.blogspot.com/2007/09/giuliani-and-his-cell-phone.html
Antonina " That's it i'm turning democrat"
http://ladyantoninakrystyna.blogspot.com/2007/10/thats-it-im-turning-republican.html
Marcus " Saturday, October 6, 2007"
http://pierulesyou.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2007-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2008-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=14
Devon " News Reporting and Writing 1 Untitled"
http://devonhaley.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-recently-saw-article-in-past-issue-of.html
Laura D " Hilary Clinton No Joke"
http://newsreportingandwriting.blogspot.com/2007/10/public-should-be-protected-from.html
Briana " Really.. what the fuck"
http://brianaword.blogspot.com/2007/10/reallywhat-fuck.html
Hannah " Election $$$"
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1262959131330397320&postID=1831312901532624614
Jen " Giuliani...um...9/11"
http://jenfursblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/giuliani-um-911.html
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Ethics
Alright I wont lie (no pun intended) this ethics chapter was pretty repetitive considering the fact that I am taking an ethics class and just was tested on this thursday but hey ya know i guess it was good review. I learned alot about myself as a person and a journalist.
I knew the purpose of journalism was to provide citizens with accurate and reliable information they need to function in society. I knew that journalism's first obligation was to the truth, its first loyatly was to citizens, it must serve as an independent monitor of power and provide a forum for public criticism. It must strive to make the significant sound interesting and relevant, and ultimately keep the news balanced and fair. I knew about the ethical dilemnas that can arise on the job and I have started to become familiar with the vocabulary of ethicisits. I knew the definition and the differences between deontological, teleological and situation ethics. But what I learned was where I stand ethically as a person AND a journalist.
I found the ethical guidelines really interesting and although I knew them, I liked how they spelled them out. Journalists must exibit responsibility, acknowledge their right to freedom of the press, practice impartiality, sincerity, truthfullness and accuracy, fairplay and last but not least decency.
I learned alot about ethical problems that journalists face sometimes day to day. I learned how bad it is deceiving people to get a story, reporting with conflicts of interest such as friendships or accepting payment or freebies for stories and for paying for sources. You also need to be wary of advertising pressure and participation in the news. The biggest ones of course are dealing with the invasion of privacy and withholding information vs the public's right to know and of course the biggest sin of all is plagiarizing by passing off someone else's work as your own.
But most importantly I learned the three guildlines that will keep you out of trouble. One should be free of obligations to anyone except the truth, be fair, and remember good taste. Solving ethical dilemnas can be difficult though. Using principled reasoning will help you decide which ways are proper and moral ways to act. But reasoning can be diffiuclt in itself so I really appreciated the Potter Box of elements to help use moral reasoning to make ethical decisions.
Even though you know them I'm going to list them because they are important for me and my professional future.
1. Appraising the situation by gathering the facts from a variety of different sources.
2. Identifying your personal values, your community's values, your nation's values, and your new's organizations values.
3. Appealing to ethical principles and determining how can you fulfill your duty to yourself and to the audience.
4. Choosing who you owe your loyalities to either your news organizations, your viewers, your sources, and the public.
Usually there is no clear answer to a difficult ethical dilemna but at least I know how to TRY to analyze and resolve these problems now. Finally as a member of the Society of Professional Journalists myself, it was really interesting to see their Code of Ethics. It was nice to become familiar with them so I can practice them in real life!!
I knew the purpose of journalism was to provide citizens with accurate and reliable information they need to function in society. I knew that journalism's first obligation was to the truth, its first loyatly was to citizens, it must serve as an independent monitor of power and provide a forum for public criticism. It must strive to make the significant sound interesting and relevant, and ultimately keep the news balanced and fair. I knew about the ethical dilemnas that can arise on the job and I have started to become familiar with the vocabulary of ethicisits. I knew the definition and the differences between deontological, teleological and situation ethics. But what I learned was where I stand ethically as a person AND a journalist.
I found the ethical guidelines really interesting and although I knew them, I liked how they spelled them out. Journalists must exibit responsibility, acknowledge their right to freedom of the press, practice impartiality, sincerity, truthfullness and accuracy, fairplay and last but not least decency.
I learned alot about ethical problems that journalists face sometimes day to day. I learned how bad it is deceiving people to get a story, reporting with conflicts of interest such as friendships or accepting payment or freebies for stories and for paying for sources. You also need to be wary of advertising pressure and participation in the news. The biggest ones of course are dealing with the invasion of privacy and withholding information vs the public's right to know and of course the biggest sin of all is plagiarizing by passing off someone else's work as your own.
But most importantly I learned the three guildlines that will keep you out of trouble. One should be free of obligations to anyone except the truth, be fair, and remember good taste. Solving ethical dilemnas can be difficult though. Using principled reasoning will help you decide which ways are proper and moral ways to act. But reasoning can be diffiuclt in itself so I really appreciated the Potter Box of elements to help use moral reasoning to make ethical decisions.
Even though you know them I'm going to list them because they are important for me and my professional future.
1. Appraising the situation by gathering the facts from a variety of different sources.
2. Identifying your personal values, your community's values, your nation's values, and your new's organizations values.
3. Appealing to ethical principles and determining how can you fulfill your duty to yourself and to the audience.
4. Choosing who you owe your loyalities to either your news organizations, your viewers, your sources, and the public.
Usually there is no clear answer to a difficult ethical dilemna but at least I know how to TRY to analyze and resolve these problems now. Finally as a member of the Society of Professional Journalists myself, it was really interesting to see their Code of Ethics. It was nice to become familiar with them so I can practice them in real life!!
Obama's Energy Crisis Plan
I was realllly excited to see that Obama rolled out an energy plan to combat the global warming crisis!! According to MSNBC Obama called for a national plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050 and an investment of $150 billion over the next ten years to develop new technology to create sources of renewable energy etc.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/10/09/403124.aspx
Personally I'm really glad that Obama is recoginizing there IS a problem and that we need to plan for it NOW or else we are going to have HUGE problem on our hands in just a few years. We can already see it is starting to happen and I am glad Obama is a candidate that is dedicated to this. I'm sure the town of Ithaca will support this plan too because sustainablity is really important to the residents here. I'm curious to see what they would have to say!
Obama also told MSNBC that he wants to get the United States more involved with the world in combating climate change while stressing the importance of individual responsibility in energy consumption which I think is really awesome. He seems really committed and I feel that he is sincere and not just trying to win voters. This is a big step for America.
It's interesting that his democratic rival, Hilary Clinton hasn't advocated for this yet. Obama's plan received praise from the League of Conservation Voters for embracing a cap on carbon emissions so it is definitely receiving some well deserved attention! I'm curious to see what Clinton will do to follow up.
Although Obama did attack the lobbyists in Washington for allowing this energy reform system to exist and recent Presidents for allowing America to depend on foreign oil... some people could be upset but I say it was fair game.
Obama's pledge couldn't have had better timing. After making campaign stops through Iowa last week, voters especially small famers who could benefit from ethanol production, were able to ask questions about how he would reduce American dependence on foreign oil and how he would help global warming.
One interesting that the the Associated Press touched on was the fact that businesses will have to start paying for the pollution they create. I thought this was an amazinnng idea because money does speak louder then words. He said " No businesses willbe allowed to emit greenhouse gases for free. Businesses don't own the sky, the public does, and if we want them to stop polluting it, we have to put a price on air pollution."
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jNlJOuGuTs5qgEuIws8f56V48hyAD8S5EV780
Clever Obama. Clever. They can call him inexperienced but he's smart. Whitehouse watch out!
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/10/09/403124.aspx
Personally I'm really glad that Obama is recoginizing there IS a problem and that we need to plan for it NOW or else we are going to have HUGE problem on our hands in just a few years. We can already see it is starting to happen and I am glad Obama is a candidate that is dedicated to this. I'm sure the town of Ithaca will support this plan too because sustainablity is really important to the residents here. I'm curious to see what they would have to say!
Obama also told MSNBC that he wants to get the United States more involved with the world in combating climate change while stressing the importance of individual responsibility in energy consumption which I think is really awesome. He seems really committed and I feel that he is sincere and not just trying to win voters. This is a big step for America.
It's interesting that his democratic rival, Hilary Clinton hasn't advocated for this yet. Obama's plan received praise from the League of Conservation Voters for embracing a cap on carbon emissions so it is definitely receiving some well deserved attention! I'm curious to see what Clinton will do to follow up.
Although Obama did attack the lobbyists in Washington for allowing this energy reform system to exist and recent Presidents for allowing America to depend on foreign oil... some people could be upset but I say it was fair game.
Obama's pledge couldn't have had better timing. After making campaign stops through Iowa last week, voters especially small famers who could benefit from ethanol production, were able to ask questions about how he would reduce American dependence on foreign oil and how he would help global warming.
One interesting that the the Associated Press touched on was the fact that businesses will have to start paying for the pollution they create. I thought this was an amazinnng idea because money does speak louder then words. He said " No businesses willbe allowed to emit greenhouse gases for free. Businesses don't own the sky, the public does, and if we want them to stop polluting it, we have to put a price on air pollution."
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jNlJOuGuTs5qgEuIws8f56V48hyAD8S5EV780
Clever Obama. Clever. They can call him inexperienced but he's smart. Whitehouse watch out!
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Random tidbits on becoming a professional
After reading Politics and The English Language by George Orwell I was stunned by his blunt tactics of conveying the downfall in prose. He definitely picks out some really good examples of how modern writing consists of "gumming together long strips of words which have already been set in order by someone else," because it's pretty much easier to use ready made phrases. To me I've never really been told to copy any one else so this was interesting to hear.
I didn't really care for the reading I thought it was a little too loaded but I did agree with the fact that just as thought can corrupt language, language can corrupt thought- a bad usage can be spread like wildfire. I thought many of his points were pretty deep and I had a hard time relating and breaking down what he had to say. However, I did get the most out of these rules to avoid failure.
Never use a long word when a short word will do, never use passive when you can use active, and never use a foreign phrase/scientific phrase/jargon when an English equivalent will suffice. These were pretty good rules because its interesting that like me, he too must feel that modern writing has become too wordy, too messy and too obscure for no reason. You don't need to wow your reader because in the end you lose them.
The Five Characteristics of Academic or Scholarly Prose echoed that of Orwell. Prose uses more inflated writing, which is generally less effective than a direct style. After reading the examples, which differentiated the two, I began to prefer the direct style to the scholarly style. First of all, the academic style embellishes sentences more than necessary, uses static verbs, which are harder to follow, and uses long, complex sentence structures, which make it harder for the reader to abstract meaning.
To me this reading was interesting to see how the two styles are characterized and how they can tell the same story in such different ways. To me the direct style makes more sense because it gets right to the point and it made me realize how frustrating it can be for a reader to be bored by a sentence when a simple sentence would do. Now I know what not to do!!!
I found the reading on Three Mile Island to be really interesting. After writing the article we did on class and having no real background knowledge on the plant myself, I realized I was in the same boat as a lot of the reporters back then. Many of them were rather ignorant because back then they weren’t many beat reporters and this was something as foreign to them as it was to me.
It was also interesting that although it was a pretty big story, only the major news organizations turned out at the site forcing other dailies to rely on coverage by the main media outlets such as the two wire services.
I thought it was really interesting how the reporters broke down the different aspects that made this story newsworthy. It was very unique, it prompted fear, it had geographical importance, it had conflicting information since it was very complex, it had potential for catastrophe, it attracted the attention of the energy conscious and also was a huge coincidence to the release of a popular film the China Syndrome, which dramatized such an accident. By breaking down these aspects it helped me to see how Three Mile Island was such a huge story for reporters back then!!!
This article also highlighted some interesting things. How the reporters had to scramble for sources, how they handled confusing information, and how they covered accidents - inform the public about everything as soon as it happens. Lastly, it was really amusing to see how some reporters outright admitted to sensationalizing the story. They said it crept into the coverage because it was unnerving experience overwhelming a small town, and because the story itself was filled with “what if” questions which fueled drama.
I think this article really outlined the problems reporters came in contact and did a nice job on preparing better for future accidents. It was really cool to read!!!
After reading chapter 8 I realized the main point: good writing begins with good reporting. But what is good writing? It seemed to me to be a little broad. I learned good writing is precise, clear and concrete. It shows rather than tells and uses figures of speech.
By avoiding unbiased language, avoiding carelessness in word choice and increasing comprehension with numbers, a writer is able to be more precise and able communicate exactly what you mean. The book also highlighted some good tips on how to write clearly. I should remember to keep my sentences short and focused on one idea, avoid using too many numbers and prepositional phrases and use plain and simple words instead of jargon. Remembering these tips and also using correct grammar will help me keep my stories clear, simple and coherent for my reader.
Finally, I learned that clarity is in the details and that you should always be specific. One creative sentence I liked was that you should “chauffeur the reader through the scenes in your story.” This really drives home the point that you should include anecdotes and statistics to not only tell but also show information to engage and entertain your reader. Lastly, good writers know how to use literary devices such as analogies in order to “draw word pictures.” This is one aspect I know I need to work on as a writer!!
I know writing to be read isn’t easy but in the end I realized it can make or break the story for you AND your reader!!
The last chapter after a long day of reading was chapter 22, Media Law. All in the entire chapter was particularly boring for me because I hate law but I did learn a lot of new things here and there through the tedious reading.
In general I learned what rights I have as a journalist and what to do in specific situations regarding libel, invasion of privacy, confidential sources, access to the courtroom and copyright laws.
One thing that really scared me was libel. Ken Paulson outlined a few tips to avoiding libel, which really put me at ease. You should ask yourself: Have I reported fully, factually, fairly and in good faith? Paulson said if you can answer those questions positively and confidently then the law will take care of itself.
However, I learned the most about defenses to libel and slander and related concepts essential to journalists. I was really able to understand the difference between the two, see how we are protected under law, and what our constitutional privileges are. The three traditional defenses against libel are truth, privilege and fair comment and criticism. In addition to this I realized that with the invasion of privacy came the fact that you cannot trespass and you cannot portray someone in a “false light.”
I know I will have to review these again before I enter the real world because this chapter had a lot of important information for me to swallow!! Although I had read a chapter like this before in Intro, maybe it’s even the same one because it sounded familiar, I did take away some new things.
I didn't really care for the reading I thought it was a little too loaded but I did agree with the fact that just as thought can corrupt language, language can corrupt thought- a bad usage can be spread like wildfire. I thought many of his points were pretty deep and I had a hard time relating and breaking down what he had to say. However, I did get the most out of these rules to avoid failure.
Never use a long word when a short word will do, never use passive when you can use active, and never use a foreign phrase/scientific phrase/jargon when an English equivalent will suffice. These were pretty good rules because its interesting that like me, he too must feel that modern writing has become too wordy, too messy and too obscure for no reason. You don't need to wow your reader because in the end you lose them.
The Five Characteristics of Academic or Scholarly Prose echoed that of Orwell. Prose uses more inflated writing, which is generally less effective than a direct style. After reading the examples, which differentiated the two, I began to prefer the direct style to the scholarly style. First of all, the academic style embellishes sentences more than necessary, uses static verbs, which are harder to follow, and uses long, complex sentence structures, which make it harder for the reader to abstract meaning.
To me this reading was interesting to see how the two styles are characterized and how they can tell the same story in such different ways. To me the direct style makes more sense because it gets right to the point and it made me realize how frustrating it can be for a reader to be bored by a sentence when a simple sentence would do. Now I know what not to do!!!
I found the reading on Three Mile Island to be really interesting. After writing the article we did on class and having no real background knowledge on the plant myself, I realized I was in the same boat as a lot of the reporters back then. Many of them were rather ignorant because back then they weren’t many beat reporters and this was something as foreign to them as it was to me.
It was also interesting that although it was a pretty big story, only the major news organizations turned out at the site forcing other dailies to rely on coverage by the main media outlets such as the two wire services.
I thought it was really interesting how the reporters broke down the different aspects that made this story newsworthy. It was very unique, it prompted fear, it had geographical importance, it had conflicting information since it was very complex, it had potential for catastrophe, it attracted the attention of the energy conscious and also was a huge coincidence to the release of a popular film the China Syndrome, which dramatized such an accident. By breaking down these aspects it helped me to see how Three Mile Island was such a huge story for reporters back then!!!
This article also highlighted some interesting things. How the reporters had to scramble for sources, how they handled confusing information, and how they covered accidents - inform the public about everything as soon as it happens. Lastly, it was really amusing to see how some reporters outright admitted to sensationalizing the story. They said it crept into the coverage because it was unnerving experience overwhelming a small town, and because the story itself was filled with “what if” questions which fueled drama.
I think this article really outlined the problems reporters came in contact and did a nice job on preparing better for future accidents. It was really cool to read!!!
After reading chapter 8 I realized the main point: good writing begins with good reporting. But what is good writing? It seemed to me to be a little broad. I learned good writing is precise, clear and concrete. It shows rather than tells and uses figures of speech.
By avoiding unbiased language, avoiding carelessness in word choice and increasing comprehension with numbers, a writer is able to be more precise and able communicate exactly what you mean. The book also highlighted some good tips on how to write clearly. I should remember to keep my sentences short and focused on one idea, avoid using too many numbers and prepositional phrases and use plain and simple words instead of jargon. Remembering these tips and also using correct grammar will help me keep my stories clear, simple and coherent for my reader.
Finally, I learned that clarity is in the details and that you should always be specific. One creative sentence I liked was that you should “chauffeur the reader through the scenes in your story.” This really drives home the point that you should include anecdotes and statistics to not only tell but also show information to engage and entertain your reader. Lastly, good writers know how to use literary devices such as analogies in order to “draw word pictures.” This is one aspect I know I need to work on as a writer!!
I know writing to be read isn’t easy but in the end I realized it can make or break the story for you AND your reader!!
The last chapter after a long day of reading was chapter 22, Media Law. All in the entire chapter was particularly boring for me because I hate law but I did learn a lot of new things here and there through the tedious reading.
In general I learned what rights I have as a journalist and what to do in specific situations regarding libel, invasion of privacy, confidential sources, access to the courtroom and copyright laws.
One thing that really scared me was libel. Ken Paulson outlined a few tips to avoiding libel, which really put me at ease. You should ask yourself: Have I reported fully, factually, fairly and in good faith? Paulson said if you can answer those questions positively and confidently then the law will take care of itself.
However, I learned the most about defenses to libel and slander and related concepts essential to journalists. I was really able to understand the difference between the two, see how we are protected under law, and what our constitutional privileges are. The three traditional defenses against libel are truth, privilege and fair comment and criticism. In addition to this I realized that with the invasion of privacy came the fact that you cannot trespass and you cannot portray someone in a “false light.”
I know I will have to review these again before I enter the real world because this chapter had a lot of important information for me to swallow!! Although I had read a chapter like this before in Intro, maybe it’s even the same one because it sounded familiar, I did take away some new things.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Guiliani Pulls Ahead in Fundraising
With the end of the 3rd quarter now closed, it's not out of the question that Romney could significantly catch up to Rudy as the republican nomination race unfolds.
According to Time, Giuliani is ahead in the national polls for fundraising and is proving to be "steadier and more resilient" than GOP veterans expected. While Giuliani has 26 million dollars to work with, Romney is maintaining some competition with 8 million. Time believes this means he will have enough money for the REAL republican race this fall and winter.
While the bank accounts are going strong, the two candidates seem to be battling it out on all fronts this week. After accusing each other of being too soft on abortion, same sex marriage, immigration, stem cells, taxes and spending and the war on terror, TIme believes this is all pretty tame compared to what lies ahead.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1668892,00.html
Although I don't know whose going to emerge as the winner, I'm willing to take a bet Rudy is going to come out with less scratches considering the fact he's kept himself pretty bruiseless in the midst of New York City politics which is quite a feat. I think Guiliani defnitely is playing a good strategy. He was quoted by Times as saying " I'm not perfect, but I can keep you safer." I think this will really appeal to the public because I think they are desperately trying to find someone they trust right now in a world full of fear. If Guiliani can appeal to those people, he has a VERY strong support base.
According to another source- Reuters- Mitt Romney is scrambling up ways to dismantle his top rival, Rudy Guiliani. Earlier today he took an aim at the New York's mayor and accused him for his big spending policies. Reuter's said that Romney is trying to instill doubt in Guiliani's republican credentials by attacking his stance in favor of abortion rights. Although there has been few brawls yet between the two, Reuters expects that the real wrestling match could occur next Tuesday at the republican debate in Michigan. http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0545977320071005
Something I thought was pretty interesting was that the Associated Press dubbed their headline of the same story " Romney Is His Own Biggest Donor." According to the AP, Romney seems to be digging into his pocket more and more to cut himself checks in order to stay competitive in the race. Apparently Romney said "financing his own campaign would be a nightmare and that cutting checks this week was painful"...however it doens't seem to be stopping him!! I give him credit because he's giving it his all, literally, so he must really want it.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iJ42U3tCxykgoo-L2iG_lMJUUNYQD8S3B7C80
Some people seem to be pretty outraged that Romney is trying to "buy" the nomination but personally it doesn't really bother me. Although his donations have dropped from 21 million dollars in the first 3 months to only 10 million this past quarter, Romney's advisors say he will continue to support his candicacy as long as he feels he has a reasonable chance. He must be pretty confident right now which says a lot about his desire and optimism in becoming President.
Personally, I'm pretty excited because as of right now, the two front runners have started to create some sparks proving they REALLY want it over the other. In comparison however to Obama and Clinton who continuously butt heads the republican candidates need to step up their game. I'd still like to see the republican nominees battle it out. I think Guiliani is a very strong candidate as is obvious by his lead in every national poll, but it makes me curious to see what Romney has to offer.
According to Time, Giuliani is ahead in the national polls for fundraising and is proving to be "steadier and more resilient" than GOP veterans expected. While Giuliani has 26 million dollars to work with, Romney is maintaining some competition with 8 million. Time believes this means he will have enough money for the REAL republican race this fall and winter.
While the bank accounts are going strong, the two candidates seem to be battling it out on all fronts this week. After accusing each other of being too soft on abortion, same sex marriage, immigration, stem cells, taxes and spending and the war on terror, TIme believes this is all pretty tame compared to what lies ahead.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1668892,00.html
Although I don't know whose going to emerge as the winner, I'm willing to take a bet Rudy is going to come out with less scratches considering the fact he's kept himself pretty bruiseless in the midst of New York City politics which is quite a feat. I think Guiliani defnitely is playing a good strategy. He was quoted by Times as saying " I'm not perfect, but I can keep you safer." I think this will really appeal to the public because I think they are desperately trying to find someone they trust right now in a world full of fear. If Guiliani can appeal to those people, he has a VERY strong support base.
According to another source- Reuters- Mitt Romney is scrambling up ways to dismantle his top rival, Rudy Guiliani. Earlier today he took an aim at the New York's mayor and accused him for his big spending policies. Reuter's said that Romney is trying to instill doubt in Guiliani's republican credentials by attacking his stance in favor of abortion rights. Although there has been few brawls yet between the two, Reuters expects that the real wrestling match could occur next Tuesday at the republican debate in Michigan. http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0545977320071005
Something I thought was pretty interesting was that the Associated Press dubbed their headline of the same story " Romney Is His Own Biggest Donor." According to the AP, Romney seems to be digging into his pocket more and more to cut himself checks in order to stay competitive in the race. Apparently Romney said "financing his own campaign would be a nightmare and that cutting checks this week was painful"...however it doens't seem to be stopping him!! I give him credit because he's giving it his all, literally, so he must really want it.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iJ42U3tCxykgoo-L2iG_lMJUUNYQD8S3B7C80
Some people seem to be pretty outraged that Romney is trying to "buy" the nomination but personally it doesn't really bother me. Although his donations have dropped from 21 million dollars in the first 3 months to only 10 million this past quarter, Romney's advisors say he will continue to support his candicacy as long as he feels he has a reasonable chance. He must be pretty confident right now which says a lot about his desire and optimism in becoming President.
Personally, I'm pretty excited because as of right now, the two front runners have started to create some sparks proving they REALLY want it over the other. In comparison however to Obama and Clinton who continuously butt heads the republican candidates need to step up their game. I'd still like to see the republican nominees battle it out. I think Guiliani is a very strong candidate as is obvious by his lead in every national poll, but it makes me curious to see what Romney has to offer.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
News Releases, Speeches, News Conferences and Meetings...
Something I never really thought about was the fact that news releases are good and bad for a newspaper. They are helpful because they give you a lead for a story but at the same time they often promote the interests of the organization that handed it out.
First of all I learned there is more then one type of news release. Silly me for thinking things were simple!! There is the announcement of coming events which is an attempt at free publicity. Next there is the cause-promoting release which is community oriented and like it sounds seeks to promote a cause for example raising funds. Finally there are the image- building releases which are pretty self explanatory, they promote the image of the candidate and are thus self serving.
Also, dont be fooled! News releases usually have missing information, so don't turn into a slacker when you get handed one of these releases,your job as a reporter is just beginning! After you finish the reporting you are to rewrite the story to make sure it follows AP guidelines and also to maintain integrity and professionalism.
Some other things to remember are to read the release carefully, check the accuracy of cite studies, polls or surveys and possible bias and throw out any information you can't confirm. When rewriting make sure to present the information clearly and objectively.
The book outlines how to handle a news release very clearly, I found it pretty helpful. I was reminded to read the information that appears on the top of the release form, check the AP news style, fill in missing information by doing some of your own reporting, watch for self serving bias, and look for other possible news stories that can be triggered by the release.
In the end I found the chapter to be pretty cool. After reading the story by Judd Slivka, I thought his quote was pretty clever. It really summed up how news releases can make the most important story of your life. "I hate news releases. Most of them are blasted out to lists of reporters without any thought about who's on the receiving end, and thus are wastes of time. But another truth is that I read them,hoping to find a diamond of a story in the rough unsolicited press releases."
While reading the chapter on speeches, news conferences, and meetings I really learned the importance of preparing before such an event. Like the book said, failure to get enough background information on the speaker and the speech almost gurantees failure at writing a comprehensive story.
I also learned that preparing and attending for the event is not enough. You have to make sure you get the content correct, record accurate quotes, and note the mannerisms of the main participants. Also when covering the event make sure to check out the audience size and reactions, and make sure to get there early and hang around afterward. You never know what insider information you can get, you may even find the golden nugget for your story. In other words one key tip to remember is to be sure to record what the recorder misses - gestures, facial expressions etc.
I realy liked the way the book simply and plainly stated that when you quote a whole speech you are not reporting it, you are simply recording it. The hard part is deteriming whats newsworthy!! The book really drove home the fact that even though covering routine meetings can be boring, part of your job as a reporter is to make it interesting for the reader! And even for common events like speeches, you are always expected to write well.
First of all I learned there is more then one type of news release. Silly me for thinking things were simple!! There is the announcement of coming events which is an attempt at free publicity. Next there is the cause-promoting release which is community oriented and like it sounds seeks to promote a cause for example raising funds. Finally there are the image- building releases which are pretty self explanatory, they promote the image of the candidate and are thus self serving.
Also, dont be fooled! News releases usually have missing information, so don't turn into a slacker when you get handed one of these releases,your job as a reporter is just beginning! After you finish the reporting you are to rewrite the story to make sure it follows AP guidelines and also to maintain integrity and professionalism.
Some other things to remember are to read the release carefully, check the accuracy of cite studies, polls or surveys and possible bias and throw out any information you can't confirm. When rewriting make sure to present the information clearly and objectively.
The book outlines how to handle a news release very clearly, I found it pretty helpful. I was reminded to read the information that appears on the top of the release form, check the AP news style, fill in missing information by doing some of your own reporting, watch for self serving bias, and look for other possible news stories that can be triggered by the release.
In the end I found the chapter to be pretty cool. After reading the story by Judd Slivka, I thought his quote was pretty clever. It really summed up how news releases can make the most important story of your life. "I hate news releases. Most of them are blasted out to lists of reporters without any thought about who's on the receiving end, and thus are wastes of time. But another truth is that I read them,hoping to find a diamond of a story in the rough unsolicited press releases."
While reading the chapter on speeches, news conferences, and meetings I really learned the importance of preparing before such an event. Like the book said, failure to get enough background information on the speaker and the speech almost gurantees failure at writing a comprehensive story.
I also learned that preparing and attending for the event is not enough. You have to make sure you get the content correct, record accurate quotes, and note the mannerisms of the main participants. Also when covering the event make sure to check out the audience size and reactions, and make sure to get there early and hang around afterward. You never know what insider information you can get, you may even find the golden nugget for your story. In other words one key tip to remember is to be sure to record what the recorder misses - gestures, facial expressions etc.
I realy liked the way the book simply and plainly stated that when you quote a whole speech you are not reporting it, you are simply recording it. The hard part is deteriming whats newsworthy!! The book really drove home the fact that even though covering routine meetings can be boring, part of your job as a reporter is to make it interesting for the reader! And even for common events like speeches, you are always expected to write well.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Clinton Cracking?
Actually I found it a little bizzare that the New York Times headline read "Laughing Matters in Clinton Campaign." Like the case where Rather cried on the Late Night show, I feel like reporters are picking on the emotions of people under pressure.
According to the article Clinton had just finished a serious speech about abortion rights and tried to find common ground with her listeners by connecting woman to woman. However, offstage she was immediately grilled by reporters about her own pro- choice decision. Thats when she " let loose a hearty belly laugh." To the reporters who thought they had missed a joke, it seemed that this time her chuckle was basically an eye roll.
Hilary's friends supported Clinton by saying it was her own sense of humor but was probably too sarcastic to share with the general public. After hearing both sides I'm not really sure about the origination of the laugh, but I am starting to find my self feeling sorry for the candidates. It makes you realize the type of political attacks and criticsm these people are under at every moment of their lives. She is the leading democratic candidate right now and I'm sure she has moments where she needs to maintain composure without seeming brittle, defensive, or weak.
However what the Times had to say was pretty interesting. After analyzing her other "cackles" they concluded that there were certain times where she was able to force it or fight it off. To me however it seems like maybe her agents are trying to sway her serious reputation to show the public that she really is a "joyful" person.
Like me, Clinton advisers themselves think the "concentration on Clinton's laughter is a little laughable." According to the site, the advisers are "bemused and irritated by questions that say Clinton is less then genuine" - such as whether her use of laughter is used to avoid or undercut a particularly controversial or difficult question.
After laughing and then being confronted at a news conference, Hilary said, " You guys keep telling me to lighten up,be fun. Now I get a little funny, and I'm being psychoanalyzed."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/28/us/politics/28web-healy.html?8dpc
In another article by the Washington Post, there were several jabs made by other presidential candidates but none by Clinton. According to the article she "smothered every question with a blanket of condition responses, so reluctant to take a stand that she frusterated Tim Russert, the designated questioner."
The Granite Star Poll released before the debate that Clinton drew 43 percent of the support, with Obama, Edwards, and Richardson trailing with 20, 12, and six percent respectively. However, I'm curious to see if Clinton can maintain her lead without "making waves."
To me it seems that Clinton is just trying to coast right now and ride out her lead, boost her personality ratings and stray away from anything too controversial that could jeperadize her lead in the race. Perhaps thats a good game to be playing. It is evident she is playing defense and taking safe stands. Maybe thats a good strategy for her right now... but it could also be pretty risky!! As the Post headline exemplifies, Clinton is playing "dodgeball." Time will tell if it will take her through the next couple of months still as the top dog.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/28/AR2007092801341.html
According to the article Clinton had just finished a serious speech about abortion rights and tried to find common ground with her listeners by connecting woman to woman. However, offstage she was immediately grilled by reporters about her own pro- choice decision. Thats when she " let loose a hearty belly laugh." To the reporters who thought they had missed a joke, it seemed that this time her chuckle was basically an eye roll.
Hilary's friends supported Clinton by saying it was her own sense of humor but was probably too sarcastic to share with the general public. After hearing both sides I'm not really sure about the origination of the laugh, but I am starting to find my self feeling sorry for the candidates. It makes you realize the type of political attacks and criticsm these people are under at every moment of their lives. She is the leading democratic candidate right now and I'm sure she has moments where she needs to maintain composure without seeming brittle, defensive, or weak.
However what the Times had to say was pretty interesting. After analyzing her other "cackles" they concluded that there were certain times where she was able to force it or fight it off. To me however it seems like maybe her agents are trying to sway her serious reputation to show the public that she really is a "joyful" person.
Like me, Clinton advisers themselves think the "concentration on Clinton's laughter is a little laughable." According to the site, the advisers are "bemused and irritated by questions that say Clinton is less then genuine" - such as whether her use of laughter is used to avoid or undercut a particularly controversial or difficult question.
After laughing and then being confronted at a news conference, Hilary said, " You guys keep telling me to lighten up,be fun. Now I get a little funny, and I'm being psychoanalyzed."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/28/us/politics/28web-healy.html?8dpc
In another article by the Washington Post, there were several jabs made by other presidential candidates but none by Clinton. According to the article she "smothered every question with a blanket of condition responses, so reluctant to take a stand that she frusterated Tim Russert, the designated questioner."
The Granite Star Poll released before the debate that Clinton drew 43 percent of the support, with Obama, Edwards, and Richardson trailing with 20, 12, and six percent respectively. However, I'm curious to see if Clinton can maintain her lead without "making waves."
To me it seems that Clinton is just trying to coast right now and ride out her lead, boost her personality ratings and stray away from anything too controversial that could jeperadize her lead in the race. Perhaps thats a good game to be playing. It is evident she is playing defense and taking safe stands. Maybe thats a good strategy for her right now... but it could also be pretty risky!! As the Post headline exemplifies, Clinton is playing "dodgeball." Time will tell if it will take her through the next couple of months still as the top dog.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/28/AR2007092801341.html
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Beyond the Pyramid
Usually my writing style screams feature so let me tell you I was pretty excited to read this chapter about narraration and telling a story to build a climax instead of giving it all away in the FIRST sentence. I know there's a need for it to save reader's and listener's time but its simply not entertaining to alwaysss use the inverted pyramid!!
One of my favorite things to do is to help the reader "see." I think it so important to write a scene by capturing the five senses. Throughout the chapter I learned the most important things to move a story along. You must create vivid scenes, let the actors speak to each other through dialogue, foreshadow important events and relate memorable anecdotes. And let me say that doing all of those things successfully is not easy but its what makes a story.
Foreshadowing is the technique of giving hints about whats coming. Just like in a movie, its a tease. It's so crucial to a story that it often determines if the reader will read on and its usually the most inticing. The ultimate "treats" are the anecdotes or the stories embedded in the stories. As the book says you are most likely to remember the anecdotes more than anything else in the story. However often they are sometimes hard to draw out of a source. The best tip I got was to phrase your questions to get stories.
When you use all of these elements you usually move out of the structure of the inverted pyramid. One way to use it is service journalism- MY FAVORITE! It refers to the "news you can use" and are usually sections like travel, food, and entertainment. Another really cool way to write is using the focus structure which "offeres the writer a powerful method of reducing statistics to a level readers can relate to and understand." To me this is also something I like to do because as a reader myself, I know that ten million deaths dont mean anything to me unless I'm emotionally connected somehow.
Writing the set up can be tricky because there are so many components. It consists of the transition to the theme paragraph, the theme paragraph, foreshadowing, the "so what" and the to-be-sure. If you dont present them efficiently you risk losing your reader early on. The "so what" tells the readers exactly why they should care, its the impact, its the relevance. The to-be-sure is also to be added to a story. Writers should acknowledge that there are two or more sides to a story. Then you must move onto the body.
When writing the body I learned its essential to maintain your readers interest with frequent examples to support your main points. By mixing the facts and the story line together you can keep your readers paying attention. I thought it was pretty clever to think of your story infrastructure as an interstate highway. Its a thread that moves you from one location to another and if you have to exit to introduce other ideas and information, they should be smooth just like transitions!
Lastly, I hadn't thought about it this way but stories should end, not just stop. Tie backs help complete the story and make it go full circle. Anecdotes, dialogues, scenes and good quotes all can wrap up a story quite well so I am hoping to learn to take advantage of that technique in my stories.
After reading this chapter I'm really excited because I know there are a lot more uniqe ways to write besides the inverted pyramid which can be stiffling for writers like me!
One of my favorite things to do is to help the reader "see." I think it so important to write a scene by capturing the five senses. Throughout the chapter I learned the most important things to move a story along. You must create vivid scenes, let the actors speak to each other through dialogue, foreshadow important events and relate memorable anecdotes. And let me say that doing all of those things successfully is not easy but its what makes a story.
Foreshadowing is the technique of giving hints about whats coming. Just like in a movie, its a tease. It's so crucial to a story that it often determines if the reader will read on and its usually the most inticing. The ultimate "treats" are the anecdotes or the stories embedded in the stories. As the book says you are most likely to remember the anecdotes more than anything else in the story. However often they are sometimes hard to draw out of a source. The best tip I got was to phrase your questions to get stories.
When you use all of these elements you usually move out of the structure of the inverted pyramid. One way to use it is service journalism- MY FAVORITE! It refers to the "news you can use" and are usually sections like travel, food, and entertainment. Another really cool way to write is using the focus structure which "offeres the writer a powerful method of reducing statistics to a level readers can relate to and understand." To me this is also something I like to do because as a reader myself, I know that ten million deaths dont mean anything to me unless I'm emotionally connected somehow.
Writing the set up can be tricky because there are so many components. It consists of the transition to the theme paragraph, the theme paragraph, foreshadowing, the "so what" and the to-be-sure. If you dont present them efficiently you risk losing your reader early on. The "so what" tells the readers exactly why they should care, its the impact, its the relevance. The to-be-sure is also to be added to a story. Writers should acknowledge that there are two or more sides to a story. Then you must move onto the body.
When writing the body I learned its essential to maintain your readers interest with frequent examples to support your main points. By mixing the facts and the story line together you can keep your readers paying attention. I thought it was pretty clever to think of your story infrastructure as an interstate highway. Its a thread that moves you from one location to another and if you have to exit to introduce other ideas and information, they should be smooth just like transitions!
Lastly, I hadn't thought about it this way but stories should end, not just stop. Tie backs help complete the story and make it go full circle. Anecdotes, dialogues, scenes and good quotes all can wrap up a story quite well so I am hoping to learn to take advantage of that technique in my stories.
After reading this chapter I'm really excited because I know there are a lot more uniqe ways to write besides the inverted pyramid which can be stiffling for writers like me!
Giuliani Takes a Stand
According to the LA Times, Republican nominee Rudolph Giuliani has renounced his anti-gun positions he took when he was mayor of New York and has asked the National Rifle Association to support his candidacy. Now immediately first hearing this I got weary that he was simply trying to gain supporters but perhaps he has had a change of heart.
This appears to be a crucial step for Giuliani because he has now reassured his loyalty with the social conservatives who make up a large percentage of his backing. However, I'm curious to see how he's going to handle his upset New Yorkers and "reconcile his anti gun stands" he had previously pledged.
After the Sept. 11 attacks Giuliani created many lawsuits against reckless gun manufacturing marketing in his agressive effort to end crime in the city. I think it's a good idea because perhaps after these attacks it makes us realize we DO need guns more then ever in the event that an occasion might arise where we need self protection. Although I do realize that sometimes the wrong people get their hands on guns and could use them for harmful purposes like the Virginia Tech tradgedy but for the most part those are rare occurrences.
Although the NRA clearly supported his new stand, John McCain who has been a longtime opponent of gun control took several knocks at Giuliani during his speech saying that we are equipping potential violent criminals with dangerous weapons which could cause harm in the long run. Although I half agree with both of them, I suppose there needs to be some happy medium. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-guns22sep22,1,2440090.story?coll=la-news-politics-national&track=crosspromo
After reading the story from another source, the New York Post I was stunned to see that the headline was dramatically different then that of the LA Times. This time the headline was "Bad Call By Rude Rudy." Apparently in front of the same NRA crowd, Giuliani interupted his speech to take a phone call from his WIFE!!! First of all I immediately thought of our exercise in class with Dan Rather and Letterman. It made me realize how some news associations included Rather's crying in the lead, some included it later on and some didn't include it at all thinking it was just a minor detail. To me this is the SAME situation! I thought how funny it was that the LA Times didn't even mention it and here in the Post it was the lead!!! Anyway, I think this was a bad call on Giuliani's part because as he had already supported gun control, he walked into the speech with all eyes on him. Then he dared pick up his phone call- I think maybe he was doing it to be funny and lighten the mood but many people could have been outraged by his rudeness.
Too many of the audience members it echoed the fact that he didn't take the group seriously and to others it was just a weird joke. To me I think it was inappropriate and could have lost him supporters who were turned off by his unprofessional attitude. I don't think any president would do that. http://www.nypost.com/seven/09222007/news/nationalnews/bad_call_by_rude_rudy.htm
Time will tell if this stunt could have affected his run for the White House. Winning support of the pro-gun group could put him in a good position as the Republican candidate, it could make or break his chances as becoming the next Preident of the United States. Although I genuinely like Giuliani and half support his new position on gun laws, I'm looking on the bright side and hoping his on the spot decision to take the call can show that he has strong family values.
This appears to be a crucial step for Giuliani because he has now reassured his loyalty with the social conservatives who make up a large percentage of his backing. However, I'm curious to see how he's going to handle his upset New Yorkers and "reconcile his anti gun stands" he had previously pledged.
After the Sept. 11 attacks Giuliani created many lawsuits against reckless gun manufacturing marketing in his agressive effort to end crime in the city. I think it's a good idea because perhaps after these attacks it makes us realize we DO need guns more then ever in the event that an occasion might arise where we need self protection. Although I do realize that sometimes the wrong people get their hands on guns and could use them for harmful purposes like the Virginia Tech tradgedy but for the most part those are rare occurrences.
Although the NRA clearly supported his new stand, John McCain who has been a longtime opponent of gun control took several knocks at Giuliani during his speech saying that we are equipping potential violent criminals with dangerous weapons which could cause harm in the long run. Although I half agree with both of them, I suppose there needs to be some happy medium. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-guns22sep22,1,2440090.story?coll=la-news-politics-national&track=crosspromo
After reading the story from another source, the New York Post I was stunned to see that the headline was dramatically different then that of the LA Times. This time the headline was "Bad Call By Rude Rudy." Apparently in front of the same NRA crowd, Giuliani interupted his speech to take a phone call from his WIFE!!! First of all I immediately thought of our exercise in class with Dan Rather and Letterman. It made me realize how some news associations included Rather's crying in the lead, some included it later on and some didn't include it at all thinking it was just a minor detail. To me this is the SAME situation! I thought how funny it was that the LA Times didn't even mention it and here in the Post it was the lead!!! Anyway, I think this was a bad call on Giuliani's part because as he had already supported gun control, he walked into the speech with all eyes on him. Then he dared pick up his phone call- I think maybe he was doing it to be funny and lighten the mood but many people could have been outraged by his rudeness.
Too many of the audience members it echoed the fact that he didn't take the group seriously and to others it was just a weird joke. To me I think it was inappropriate and could have lost him supporters who were turned off by his unprofessional attitude. I don't think any president would do that. http://www.nypost.com/seven/09222007/news/nationalnews/bad_call_by_rude_rudy.htm
Time will tell if this stunt could have affected his run for the White House. Winning support of the pro-gun group could put him in a good position as the Republican candidate, it could make or break his chances as becoming the next Preident of the United States. Although I genuinely like Giuliani and half support his new position on gun laws, I'm looking on the bright side and hoping his on the spot decision to take the call can show that he has strong family values.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Random Tidbits
After reading the Poynter Online E- Media Tidbits I definitely saw a really cool side of journalism. The author of the story said that the best thing about syndicating content via an RSS feed is that you never know what will happen to it. I thought this was pretty interesting because once journalists delivers the news, which is their job, it's pretty telling to see what the public does next. If one syndicator has enough power to bring whole communities together simply by linking people with similar interests, thats cool journalism.
The Power of a Blog entry was really fascinating too because last year I read a Google text with Prof. Williams and we learned the value of categorizing the search engine to determine which links show up first on the results page. Like this example, it is evident Google has a lot of power in what they do because they can ruin someone's reputation or job for that matter with their search engine! I never really thought about the impact Google had on the lives of people but it can make or break a company, an organization or a person's life by revealing damaging material or perhaps demoting companies further down the list which only hurts the company's sales by decreasing the viewers!!!
Another random tidbit I learned was how using a timeline can affectively tell a story and improve the ease of developing and reading online journalism. In today's society it is crucial to make things quick, and easy and online journalism is making news easier to read with each passing day. The time line package example was really neat to see how journalism comes in many different forms, not just long passsages of words. Clearly, I could "read" a story by looking at the timeline, and although this is relatively new and innovative it is exciting for journalists and readers alike to see what the future brings to help present the news more effectively.
Finally the best advice I got was from Chapter 4 In Their Own Words. As a reporter you never know whats going to be quoteworthy until you actually develop an ear to search for it and seek it out. After that it becomes easy. After a lot of practice I feel I will be able to devlop my skills and in the end ultimately improve my story.
Direct quotes really add color, make a story come alive, and give stories a breath of fresh air to break up a lot of text. While these are all good things, a bad quote has the potential to ruin a story by making it unclear, dull, or just stupid. Therefore I think its crucial to understand when to summarize, when to use partial quotes or direct quotes and how to properly attribute - once you got that down, its safe to say your story will come alive.
In general I learned to follow these guidelines: use direct quotes when something is unique, someone says something uniquely, or someone important says something important. It should say something significant and meaningful to spice up your story.
One of the most important things is to get the quote exactly word for word. Sometimes this is the scariest thing for me because once someone says something unique they will never say it again. They won't even remember what they said so they can repeat it for you. So basically you get it the first time or you don't get it at all - you gotta be on your feet in this profession !!
Finally, some other tips to remember are to verify and clarify or you basically run the risk of ruining your story by making it false and unclear. Also, it is usually better to paraphrase or to use full quotes rather then confuse your reader with partial quotes. Another thing to keep in mind is that you CAN correct the grammar of a speaker. Last but not least handling information on and off the record can be pretty tricky. Usually you are advised to avoid anonymous sources so as not to damage credibility, risk being sued if you ever have to name that source, and risk the fact that your source may be lying to test the waters.
Although a lot of information appears to be common sense, they are all definitely pieces of advice that are crucial to a story. I'm glad I took notes!
The Power of a Blog entry was really fascinating too because last year I read a Google text with Prof. Williams and we learned the value of categorizing the search engine to determine which links show up first on the results page. Like this example, it is evident Google has a lot of power in what they do because they can ruin someone's reputation or job for that matter with their search engine! I never really thought about the impact Google had on the lives of people but it can make or break a company, an organization or a person's life by revealing damaging material or perhaps demoting companies further down the list which only hurts the company's sales by decreasing the viewers!!!
Another random tidbit I learned was how using a timeline can affectively tell a story and improve the ease of developing and reading online journalism. In today's society it is crucial to make things quick, and easy and online journalism is making news easier to read with each passing day. The time line package example was really neat to see how journalism comes in many different forms, not just long passsages of words. Clearly, I could "read" a story by looking at the timeline, and although this is relatively new and innovative it is exciting for journalists and readers alike to see what the future brings to help present the news more effectively.
Finally the best advice I got was from Chapter 4 In Their Own Words. As a reporter you never know whats going to be quoteworthy until you actually develop an ear to search for it and seek it out. After that it becomes easy. After a lot of practice I feel I will be able to devlop my skills and in the end ultimately improve my story.
Direct quotes really add color, make a story come alive, and give stories a breath of fresh air to break up a lot of text. While these are all good things, a bad quote has the potential to ruin a story by making it unclear, dull, or just stupid. Therefore I think its crucial to understand when to summarize, when to use partial quotes or direct quotes and how to properly attribute - once you got that down, its safe to say your story will come alive.
In general I learned to follow these guidelines: use direct quotes when something is unique, someone says something uniquely, or someone important says something important. It should say something significant and meaningful to spice up your story.
One of the most important things is to get the quote exactly word for word. Sometimes this is the scariest thing for me because once someone says something unique they will never say it again. They won't even remember what they said so they can repeat it for you. So basically you get it the first time or you don't get it at all - you gotta be on your feet in this profession !!
Finally, some other tips to remember are to verify and clarify or you basically run the risk of ruining your story by making it false and unclear. Also, it is usually better to paraphrase or to use full quotes rather then confuse your reader with partial quotes. Another thing to keep in mind is that you CAN correct the grammar of a speaker. Last but not least handling information on and off the record can be pretty tricky. Usually you are advised to avoid anonymous sources so as not to damage credibility, risk being sued if you ever have to name that source, and risk the fact that your source may be lying to test the waters.
Although a lot of information appears to be common sense, they are all definitely pieces of advice that are crucial to a story. I'm glad I took notes!
Friday, September 14, 2007
Maybe There Is No Match for the "Clinton Machine"
Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich offered a gloomy prognosis on the Republican party's chance of winning the White House in 2008. Gingrich said that in order for Republicans to have a chance, they must break with Pres. Bush and "seperate themselves from the current state of the political system... none of the candidates have done that just yet." As the Washington Post pointed out Gingrich believes, along with many other Republicans, that Hilary Clinton will win the Democratic nomination. http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/09/14/post_72.html
After speaking with awe over her campaign so far and labeling her and her husband Bill the "Clinton Machine" it made me really take a look at the presidential race. It is so interesting for me to hear someone predict this early in the race whose got the best chance but at the same time I am beginning to wonder if maybe he's right. Bill Clinton was on Oprah the SAME day Hilary was on the Ellen Degeneres show, and to others that may be nothing but if you consider it, it is something, the "Clinton Machine" wants it. Bad.
He did offer a sense of hope to the Republican party by suggesting she can be defeated, but he did say that none of the potential nominees are running a campaign just yet thats got what it takes. Although I dont know if its the best decision for Republicans to break with Bush because that could jeperadize their chance in the first place by upsetting his loyal supporters and conservative backing, I do think many Republicans realize his plan isn't working and its time for change.
Even though Gingrich had hopes of at once entering the 2008 Presidential race, it seems that now he believes his chances are very slim for making the big jump into the political waters. It could definitely spice up the race if he did!!! Even though I dont think he stands a chance, I think his ideas are pretty much on target because he does have a lot of good ideas for reforming the government. I also found it pretty interesting that a Republican would bash his own party- he's gotta be pretty certain and passionate about the fact that the nominees aren't making the right campaign moves. I completely agree with his impression of the Clinton campaign. I truly believe right now she proves the one to beat, and even though Obama and Edwards are working hard as well, like Gingrich, Clinton has impressed me too.
After reading the Reuters article it made me reconsider how Gingrich is able to say that Republicans need a "Clean break" from Bush when he is a republican himself. Wasn't that a direct hit against his party and to Bush himself? Even though Gingrich said it wasn't a direct attack at Bush it makes me question what his motives are if he isn't even supporting his own party and instead attacking it!!!
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1446262920070914?pageNumber=2
Until Gingrich decides if he is going to run in 2008, we are left with wary predictions and various reports from other news orgranizations urging republicans to make a clean break from Bush. Lets see if the nominees will take his advice and step up their game!!!
After speaking with awe over her campaign so far and labeling her and her husband Bill the "Clinton Machine" it made me really take a look at the presidential race. It is so interesting for me to hear someone predict this early in the race whose got the best chance but at the same time I am beginning to wonder if maybe he's right. Bill Clinton was on Oprah the SAME day Hilary was on the Ellen Degeneres show, and to others that may be nothing but if you consider it, it is something, the "Clinton Machine" wants it. Bad.
He did offer a sense of hope to the Republican party by suggesting she can be defeated, but he did say that none of the potential nominees are running a campaign just yet thats got what it takes. Although I dont know if its the best decision for Republicans to break with Bush because that could jeperadize their chance in the first place by upsetting his loyal supporters and conservative backing, I do think many Republicans realize his plan isn't working and its time for change.
Even though Gingrich had hopes of at once entering the 2008 Presidential race, it seems that now he believes his chances are very slim for making the big jump into the political waters. It could definitely spice up the race if he did!!! Even though I dont think he stands a chance, I think his ideas are pretty much on target because he does have a lot of good ideas for reforming the government. I also found it pretty interesting that a Republican would bash his own party- he's gotta be pretty certain and passionate about the fact that the nominees aren't making the right campaign moves. I completely agree with his impression of the Clinton campaign. I truly believe right now she proves the one to beat, and even though Obama and Edwards are working hard as well, like Gingrich, Clinton has impressed me too.
After reading the Reuters article it made me reconsider how Gingrich is able to say that Republicans need a "Clean break" from Bush when he is a republican himself. Wasn't that a direct hit against his party and to Bush himself? Even though Gingrich said it wasn't a direct attack at Bush it makes me question what his motives are if he isn't even supporting his own party and instead attacking it!!!
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1446262920070914?pageNumber=2
Until Gingrich decides if he is going to run in 2008, we are left with wary predictions and various reports from other news orgranizations urging republicans to make a clean break from Bush. Lets see if the nominees will take his advice and step up their game!!!
Saturday, September 8, 2007
The Nature of News, The Changing News Business, and Interviewing
One of the most interesting things to me is how we decide what news is. As stated in the book, the critera editors and reporters use is relevance, usefulness, and interest. But to me all of those things depend on the audience. What I think is interesting may not be interesting to my best friend,what's useful to me may not be useful to my grandmother, and what's relevant to me may not be relevant to my neighbor. I know these are broad guidelines but I feel the hardest thing for me right now as an aspiring journalist is to decipher what is news and whats not. Hopefully that will come with practice.
The book says that there are additional elements to help find a potential story: impact, conflict, novelty, prominence, proximity, and timeliness. I realized that one of the greatest challenges for a journalist is to make a dull important story sound interesting. And right now more then ever prominent names are making the headlines, and sometimes they are replacing stories that are have actual usefulness. Paris Hilton and the likes of Hollywood have been stealing the headlines and to me I'm a little concerned with this. Trust me I'm no different, I crave the hot juicy gossip about Brat Pitt and Angelina Jolie but sometimes it's a little bit overwhelming because it shows we have nothing better to do then pester the lives of others.
Sensational stories are getting a lot of coverage today, almost more so then the Iraq war. Just because they are big names, doesn't mean they should share the front page with global warming issues. But what I have to remember is that as the book says " journalism has been described as a culture's conversation with itself," and I guess it makes sense to think we are just talking about our culture, and celebrities are a big part of our culture today.
Another important thing I learned was how new technology changes how news organizations present the news. Journalists need to be practiced in all mediums and know which medium to use to present that piece of news the best. Whether it's sports scores or breaking news which can be put out the quickest on tv or online, or long articles that have a place in newspapers, journalists have to be multimedia journalists in our day and age.
Lastly, I learned that interviewing is the key to writing a story. It's the difference between mediocre reporting and good reporting. Because most fact gathering is done before an interview, interviews are best used to get reactions and emotions for your story. I realized that a lot of work goes into conducting a good interview because you must complete many steps before, during, and after interviews to ensure success. However, when it's all done it can "make" your story.
In the end, I think journalists need to be cut some slack. They have many responsibilites and right now they are getting criticized sometimes rightfully so but sometimes wrongfully so. Journalists are watch dogs, navigators, agenda setters, they monitor power, they uncover injustice, they sustain communities, they entertain and they inform us with information. Yes some changes need to be maid but we must put faith in our journalists because they are the reason we know what we know.
The book says that there are additional elements to help find a potential story: impact, conflict, novelty, prominence, proximity, and timeliness. I realized that one of the greatest challenges for a journalist is to make a dull important story sound interesting. And right now more then ever prominent names are making the headlines, and sometimes they are replacing stories that are have actual usefulness. Paris Hilton and the likes of Hollywood have been stealing the headlines and to me I'm a little concerned with this. Trust me I'm no different, I crave the hot juicy gossip about Brat Pitt and Angelina Jolie but sometimes it's a little bit overwhelming because it shows we have nothing better to do then pester the lives of others.
Sensational stories are getting a lot of coverage today, almost more so then the Iraq war. Just because they are big names, doesn't mean they should share the front page with global warming issues. But what I have to remember is that as the book says " journalism has been described as a culture's conversation with itself," and I guess it makes sense to think we are just talking about our culture, and celebrities are a big part of our culture today.
Another important thing I learned was how new technology changes how news organizations present the news. Journalists need to be practiced in all mediums and know which medium to use to present that piece of news the best. Whether it's sports scores or breaking news which can be put out the quickest on tv or online, or long articles that have a place in newspapers, journalists have to be multimedia journalists in our day and age.
Lastly, I learned that interviewing is the key to writing a story. It's the difference between mediocre reporting and good reporting. Because most fact gathering is done before an interview, interviews are best used to get reactions and emotions for your story. I realized that a lot of work goes into conducting a good interview because you must complete many steps before, during, and after interviews to ensure success. However, when it's all done it can "make" your story.
In the end, I think journalists need to be cut some slack. They have many responsibilites and right now they are getting criticized sometimes rightfully so but sometimes wrongfully so. Journalists are watch dogs, navigators, agenda setters, they monitor power, they uncover injustice, they sustain communities, they entertain and they inform us with information. Yes some changes need to be maid but we must put faith in our journalists because they are the reason we know what we know.
Is Thompson's Late Entry a Good Strategy?
After just declaring his Republican nomination for the 2008 presidential campaign, former senator Fred Thompson seems to have some slack to pick up. Was it a good strategy to commit so late in the game? It seems to me like he was on the fence and then all the sudden woke up one morning and on a whim gave it a shot. No matter what happened, he's definitely added a little twist to the game.
The Washington Post believes Thompson entered the race at a good time because " the state of the campaign is unsettled and many republican voters appear less than fully satisfied with their choices." This good be a good thing because although it is later in the game, the Post seems to think that most voters havent' even turned their attention to the race yet. Maybe he's just in time. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/06/AR2007090602358.html
On the other hand, The Washington Times predicts that " Late entry could doom Thompson," and I'm tending to agree. I feel that even though the public hasn't come close to making their decisions about the campaign, they are certainly watching whose out there traveling the country, meaning they know who really wants it. It seems to me that he has some serious catching up to do to get his name out there, let alone to gain some support in the polls. It's not like he's a returning canidate who aleady has a loyal group of dedicated voters - he has to build a credible campaign in a short amount of time. I'm curious to see if he can do it.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070907/NATION/109070078/1001
The New York Times said that his main strategy right now is to " win over conservatives who are disheartended at their current choice of republican candidates by positioning himself as the ideological and stylistic heir of Ronald Reagan." To me that sounds like he is just trying to bash the other republican nominees and use the strategies of a late president simply because he was receieved so well by the public. What concerns me is that he is simply not acting himself if he is trying to act like someone else. America doesn't need that in our government right now.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/07/2008-the-thompson-strategy/
What's also ironic is that as the Washington Times pointed out, it took Reagan three tries to win the election. Even though he is a new guy which means he will get lots of media attention I just don't think its possible to sway that many voters that quickly when it takes months for Americans to connect a name with a face.
While it seems that Thompson is just getting started, other republican candidates are out in full force. Giuliani is spending the day in Florida trying to gather support from the Cuban Americans while Romney is proposing a plan to eliminate taxes for families making an income under 200,000 dollars. It seems that Thompson is loosing ground every minute, because in the world of politics every minute counts. He has to know declaring this nomination so late was definitely not an advantage, his rivals have been working tirelessly for months now. I just don't know what he was thinking? Maybe he wasn't thinking?
When it comes down to it, I will give him a chance because he does appear to be doing pretty well in the polls early on. Perhaps Americans are just bored of the existing republican candidates and are giving him a chance as well. One things for sure, he's got a lot more impressing to do.
The Washington Post believes Thompson entered the race at a good time because " the state of the campaign is unsettled and many republican voters appear less than fully satisfied with their choices." This good be a good thing because although it is later in the game, the Post seems to think that most voters havent' even turned their attention to the race yet. Maybe he's just in time. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/06/AR2007090602358.html
On the other hand, The Washington Times predicts that " Late entry could doom Thompson," and I'm tending to agree. I feel that even though the public hasn't come close to making their decisions about the campaign, they are certainly watching whose out there traveling the country, meaning they know who really wants it. It seems to me that he has some serious catching up to do to get his name out there, let alone to gain some support in the polls. It's not like he's a returning canidate who aleady has a loyal group of dedicated voters - he has to build a credible campaign in a short amount of time. I'm curious to see if he can do it.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070907/NATION/109070078/1001
The New York Times said that his main strategy right now is to " win over conservatives who are disheartended at their current choice of republican candidates by positioning himself as the ideological and stylistic heir of Ronald Reagan." To me that sounds like he is just trying to bash the other republican nominees and use the strategies of a late president simply because he was receieved so well by the public. What concerns me is that he is simply not acting himself if he is trying to act like someone else. America doesn't need that in our government right now.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/07/2008-the-thompson-strategy/
What's also ironic is that as the Washington Times pointed out, it took Reagan three tries to win the election. Even though he is a new guy which means he will get lots of media attention I just don't think its possible to sway that many voters that quickly when it takes months for Americans to connect a name with a face.
While it seems that Thompson is just getting started, other republican candidates are out in full force. Giuliani is spending the day in Florida trying to gather support from the Cuban Americans while Romney is proposing a plan to eliminate taxes for families making an income under 200,000 dollars. It seems that Thompson is loosing ground every minute, because in the world of politics every minute counts. He has to know declaring this nomination so late was definitely not an advantage, his rivals have been working tirelessly for months now. I just don't know what he was thinking? Maybe he wasn't thinking?
When it comes down to it, I will give him a chance because he does appear to be doing pretty well in the polls early on. Perhaps Americans are just bored of the existing republican candidates and are giving him a chance as well. One things for sure, he's got a lot more impressing to do.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
The State of the News
Despite the fact that the State of the News Media 2007 said that the newspaper isn't dying just yet, my personal belief is quite different. The way I see it, the newspaper is dying within my generation, and for right now thats all that matters because in the future our generation is going to be the ones either keeping it alive or laying it to rest.
It's obvious circulation is declining within the newspaper industry and even though many people consider this to be a bad thing, people are still reading the news, in just a different medium, the internet. More people then ever are turning to their computer for up the minute stories and to me I see that as an improvement. Before this Americans had to wait until the next morning to get breaking news, now we a we have greater opportunities to stay connected with whats going on in the world. Even though the newspaper industry may feel the decline in readership, we shouldn't jump to conclusions and label it a bad thing because after all, people are still reading the news and isnt the idea of a newspaper to give people the news? Now we are doing that task a lot better, and a lot quicker, so we should consider this frightening and exciting transition a positive thing instead of a negative thing.
Although the big snag still remains, making money. As a journalist naturally I'm scared of where the industry is going. If newspapers cant keep up their circulation and online news sources can't make enough money to make ends meet, where does that leave me as an aspiring reporter?
My hope is that as more students start graduating from college and joining the industry, there will be a greater group of people specialized in online reporting and ready to take on ushering our industry and our fellow generations into an online media. I don't think that newspapers should view the Web as a threat but instead an asset, a medium to fall back on incase of eventual failure, and more optimistically a complement. If both the Web and the newspaper viewed each other as a threat, they would both fail trying to outdue the other and compete until one or the other falls short.
Even though it is still too early to tell because lets be honest newspaper companies are still surviving, they just aren't thriving, both industries should be hopeful that with the coming years we will learn to reverse the current declining trends in readership and at the same time attract online readers yet still make a profit. In the end though the most important concern is to look out for the public and make sure that we put them first and get them the news the best way we can. The stage is set for the coming years to make a big change and hopefully some big success.
It's obvious circulation is declining within the newspaper industry and even though many people consider this to be a bad thing, people are still reading the news, in just a different medium, the internet. More people then ever are turning to their computer for up the minute stories and to me I see that as an improvement. Before this Americans had to wait until the next morning to get breaking news, now we a we have greater opportunities to stay connected with whats going on in the world. Even though the newspaper industry may feel the decline in readership, we shouldn't jump to conclusions and label it a bad thing because after all, people are still reading the news and isnt the idea of a newspaper to give people the news? Now we are doing that task a lot better, and a lot quicker, so we should consider this frightening and exciting transition a positive thing instead of a negative thing.
Although the big snag still remains, making money. As a journalist naturally I'm scared of where the industry is going. If newspapers cant keep up their circulation and online news sources can't make enough money to make ends meet, where does that leave me as an aspiring reporter?
My hope is that as more students start graduating from college and joining the industry, there will be a greater group of people specialized in online reporting and ready to take on ushering our industry and our fellow generations into an online media. I don't think that newspapers should view the Web as a threat but instead an asset, a medium to fall back on incase of eventual failure, and more optimistically a complement. If both the Web and the newspaper viewed each other as a threat, they would both fail trying to outdue the other and compete until one or the other falls short.
Even though it is still too early to tell because lets be honest newspaper companies are still surviving, they just aren't thriving, both industries should be hopeful that with the coming years we will learn to reverse the current declining trends in readership and at the same time attract online readers yet still make a profit. In the end though the most important concern is to look out for the public and make sure that we put them first and get them the news the best way we can. The stage is set for the coming years to make a big change and hopefully some big success.
Monday, September 3, 2007
Clintons Teaming Up for 2008 Campaign
I knew Hilary Clinton was going to use every means possible to get elected as president. But, she's pulling out the secret weapon, her husband Bill a lot quicker then I thought.
Earlier today Hilary and Bill stepped out in New Hampshire to connect with potential voters at the Hopkinton State Fair. I found it intriguing that Hilary is already using every means necessary to get into the White House. Although her strategy to use Bill is advantageous, she definitely has one up on the other candidates who don't have a connection and a path of followers already.
The Concord Monitor online quoted residents as saying that some only came out to the fair to see Bill, not Hilary. Although I don't think Bill is trying to steal the spotlight, I genuinely think he is trying to help her in any way he can, I think Hilary is no dummy, she is definitely using that as a way to one up other candidates who don't already have loyal voters. Regardless who the fairgoers came to see, people's first agendas might have been to see the former president and then listen to the potential candidate. It's certianly obvious she's going to get the listener's ear first and receive more attention by voters because Clinton is already a household name. http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070903/FRONTPAGE/709030369
While other candiates in the race like Barack Obama have to prove to the voters that he deserves their undivided attention at such events, Hilary has an automatic right to passage and decent credibility because of her last name. I thought it was funny how some foreign newspapers covered the story- the Turkish Press didn't even mention Hilary in the lead when she's the one running for president!! http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=192455&s=&i=&t=Bill_Clinton_turns_back_clock,_Hillary_winds_it_forward
It's nice that Bill is using his celeb status to set the stage for his wife but she definitely has had an easier time gaining the spotlight in the news which is sometimes all it takes for voters to listen. Her opponnents have had to build their own reputation - Hilary already had one thanks to her husband who despite his affair which tarnished his image had captivated the United States as a great president. And to some people who know little about politics that might be all it takes. 'If Clinton was good, then this Clinton will be good.' So when Americans go into the voting machine they might realize they know little about the campaign and instead fall back on what they remember. Therefore the trust and faith they had in Bil could transfer to Hilary and increase her electability. Like the New York Times said, " Mr. Clinton's words carry weight, even if his bias is obvious" people are going to listen.
What is boils down to is that other campaigners are going to need to work even harder to get their name buzzing around town or the country for that matter. Eventhough I almost feel that it is cheating to use Bill as a means to gain voters, I suppose during the race for presidency you pull out all the stops. You can't play nice in a cut throat race with only one winner.
Earlier today Hilary and Bill stepped out in New Hampshire to connect with potential voters at the Hopkinton State Fair. I found it intriguing that Hilary is already using every means necessary to get into the White House. Although her strategy to use Bill is advantageous, she definitely has one up on the other candidates who don't have a connection and a path of followers already.
The Concord Monitor online quoted residents as saying that some only came out to the fair to see Bill, not Hilary. Although I don't think Bill is trying to steal the spotlight, I genuinely think he is trying to help her in any way he can, I think Hilary is no dummy, she is definitely using that as a way to one up other candidates who don't already have loyal voters. Regardless who the fairgoers came to see, people's first agendas might have been to see the former president and then listen to the potential candidate. It's certianly obvious she's going to get the listener's ear first and receive more attention by voters because Clinton is already a household name. http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070903/FRONTPAGE/709030369
While other candiates in the race like Barack Obama have to prove to the voters that he deserves their undivided attention at such events, Hilary has an automatic right to passage and decent credibility because of her last name. I thought it was funny how some foreign newspapers covered the story- the Turkish Press didn't even mention Hilary in the lead when she's the one running for president!! http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=192455&s=&i=&t=Bill_Clinton_turns_back_clock,_Hillary_winds_it_forward
It's nice that Bill is using his celeb status to set the stage for his wife but she definitely has had an easier time gaining the spotlight in the news which is sometimes all it takes for voters to listen. Her opponnents have had to build their own reputation - Hilary already had one thanks to her husband who despite his affair which tarnished his image had captivated the United States as a great president. And to some people who know little about politics that might be all it takes. 'If Clinton was good, then this Clinton will be good.' So when Americans go into the voting machine they might realize they know little about the campaign and instead fall back on what they remember. Therefore the trust and faith they had in Bil could transfer to Hilary and increase her electability. Like the New York Times said, " Mr. Clinton's words carry weight, even if his bias is obvious" people are going to listen.
What is boils down to is that other campaigners are going to need to work even harder to get their name buzzing around town or the country for that matter. Eventhough I almost feel that it is cheating to use Bill as a means to gain voters, I suppose during the race for presidency you pull out all the stops. You can't play nice in a cut throat race with only one winner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)