politics are interesting. the topic(s) come up in everyday conversation, and there is media coverage everywhere. there are entire television networks dedicated to political discussion/debates/coverage. yet i find that the most interesting (and really the only kind of coverage i watch) is satirical coverage. the daily show and the colbert report are two of the most successful shows aired on comedy central. they not only make you laugh, but inform the viewer of important topics in the world. almost all of my political coverage blogs have been from "indecision 2008" - comedy central's election coverage.
before satirical coverage of politics came into effect, in my opinion, the nation was much less informed on current political happenings. now with the help of jon stewart and stephen colbert, people from the tweens to retirees can enjoy. its a revolution of sorts in the way politics is viewed. its become so popular that stephen colbert jokingly put himself in the running as president because his viewers wanted him to, then had to pull himself out because he was actually taking the votes away from real candidates.
along with the comedy central shows there are also the daily monologues given by the slew of late-nite talk show hosts. jay lenno, david letterman, etc. while they poke fun at more things than just politics, it usually is made up of mostly political humor.
i like the coverage of today. while it is filled with bias - normally to the left. it still is informative. for people who really take politics seriously, go watch the news, read a magazine. but seriously, there aren't that many college age kids - who are these shows biggest demographic - who take politics very seriously. and besides that, who doesn't need a little humor in their life?
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
plagiarism = evil
PLAGIARISM IS BAD!!! i've been hearing it since middle school. never copy someone's work, or you will fail and get in deep trouble. but hey come on, who hasn't taken ideas from wikipedia and changed 2 words before transferring it into your paper. don't deny it! but who knew there were different kinds of plagiarism? i thought that was it, you copied, you're finished. no if's and's or but's about it.
yet a very good point is brought up in the Poynter article. unintentional plagiarism (although he doesn't believe such a thing exists). sometimes things just happen. and honestly, if you have a clean record, i don't believe a journalist should be fired the first time they make a mistake. maybe it is a 'sink or swim' business, but hey, shit happens.
yet, out in the real world. after the foggy goggles of college have cleared away, there comes a point when you really have to take journalism seriously. attribute quotes, cite information, etc.
save the random facts that you 'saw somewhere' for party conversation, or perhaps across the dinner table.
when it comes down to the power of the news you have to be consistent and accurate. there is little room for errors. i hate that. but it is what it is.
yet a very good point is brought up in the Poynter article. unintentional plagiarism (although he doesn't believe such a thing exists). sometimes things just happen. and honestly, if you have a clean record, i don't believe a journalist should be fired the first time they make a mistake. maybe it is a 'sink or swim' business, but hey, shit happens.
yet, out in the real world. after the foggy goggles of college have cleared away, there comes a point when you really have to take journalism seriously. attribute quotes, cite information, etc.
save the random facts that you 'saw somewhere' for party conversation, or perhaps across the dinner table.
when it comes down to the power of the news you have to be consistent and accurate. there is little room for errors. i hate that. but it is what it is.
Monday, November 26, 2007
writers strike affecting '08 election
the writers strike is not only affecting the media, it's onto politics. the writer's strike is taking away candidates main stops on the campaign road - talk shows. many candidates such as hillary clinton and john and elizabeth edwards have canceled talk show appearances. john edwards has even joined the picket line.
so is the strike hurting or helping politics? probably both. it's however the candidates choose to use it in their campaign.
abc calls it a symbiotic relationship. how? the talk show writers rely on the candidates for material, and in return, the candidates get face time. they basically feed off of each other's fire. now it's just happening on the picket line.
so is the strike hurting or helping politics? probably both. it's however the candidates choose to use it in their campaign.
abc calls it a symbiotic relationship. how? the talk show writers rely on the candidates for material, and in return, the candidates get face time. they basically feed off of each other's fire. now it's just happening on the picket line.
lots of online stuff
it seems that reading these articles was a great way to give us ideas about how to do our final projects. which i am still feeling pretty over my head on what im going to do. anyway...
there are a lot more ways to tell online news than i thought there would be. when i look at news online, it's usually a lot of print plus. my homepage is CNN.com, and they use that form a lot, but there is also quite a few clickable interactives. i really enjoy the videos that they put on to supplement stories.
the two forms that i think i found the most interesting were the slideshow/narrated slideshow and the live chats. i like how the slideshow can be designed to take the viewer through a story in its photos alone with some caption below to explain (or audio if it's narrated). with the live chats i like the idea of raw, uncut footage of a casual conversation.
when the one online article titled "you must be streaming" described how newspapers have taken online video and are making it better than TV news, i disagree. they are both strong in their own forms.
the reason that video is good is because it has possibilities to take the viewer to places that they want to go. the audience is much more in charge of what they're watching. yet this form of finding news can be much more time consuming. with TV news it is possible to find out all the news of the day in a 30-minute broadcast. the viewer may not get as many details as when viewing online, but they get all the titles and facts in an organized, compact form.
i don't really have much to say on the "what journalism can't do" article because i pretty much just disagree with the fact that they say that the media (more specifically journalism) doesn't have an influence on the way that people react to news or situations. it's funny because my mom and i just had a conversation about this the other day (hi mom!) and basically both agree that there is a much bigger influence than is actually realized. really nothing more to say on that subject i guess.
onto thinking about my final project! i'm thinking slideshow?...perhaps with audio...?...or maybe just audio...hmm...
there are a lot more ways to tell online news than i thought there would be. when i look at news online, it's usually a lot of print plus. my homepage is CNN.com, and they use that form a lot, but there is also quite a few clickable interactives. i really enjoy the videos that they put on to supplement stories.
the two forms that i think i found the most interesting were the slideshow/narrated slideshow and the live chats. i like how the slideshow can be designed to take the viewer through a story in its photos alone with some caption below to explain (or audio if it's narrated). with the live chats i like the idea of raw, uncut footage of a casual conversation.
when the one online article titled "you must be streaming" described how newspapers have taken online video and are making it better than TV news, i disagree. they are both strong in their own forms.
the reason that video is good is because it has possibilities to take the viewer to places that they want to go. the audience is much more in charge of what they're watching. yet this form of finding news can be much more time consuming. with TV news it is possible to find out all the news of the day in a 30-minute broadcast. the viewer may not get as many details as when viewing online, but they get all the titles and facts in an organized, compact form.
i don't really have much to say on the "what journalism can't do" article because i pretty much just disagree with the fact that they say that the media (more specifically journalism) doesn't have an influence on the way that people react to news or situations. it's funny because my mom and i just had a conversation about this the other day (hi mom!) and basically both agree that there is a much bigger influence than is actually realized. really nothing more to say on that subject i guess.
onto thinking about my final project! i'm thinking slideshow?...perhaps with audio...?...or maybe just audio...hmm...
Monday, November 12, 2007
live! from NY! it's ... barack obama?
barack obama made a personal appearance on saturday night live playing himself in a short skit poking fun at hilary clinton. he made a stop in new york city off of his current campaign trail. this is not the first time that obama has made out-of-the-ordinary television appearances. his campaign on MTV has given him 2 segments of television time that no presidential candidate has ever received before. smart move? i think so.
but the question remains ... was the appearance on SNL 'just for fun' or was it a political move?
but the question remains ... was the appearance on SNL 'just for fun' or was it a political move?
writing news for television and radio
when i first came to ithaca college and decided on my major, broadcast is what i had in mind. since then i have drifted towards print (more specifically feature writing). yet this chapter has reminded me why i was attracted to broadcast to begin with.
first off, i am a very conversation writer. and i believe that i write better when there is not much structure to have to worry about and the thoughts can just flow onto the paper. i really like the fact that broadcast writing is this way.
i would much rather turn on my television set than open a newspaper. there is just no comparison to getting that visualization of the news. i like the simplicity of broadcast, the way it is easy to pass on, and how words and pictures can be used to compliment one another.
one handy thing that i read in this chapter is the format of writing a broadcast piece. and that a minute of news read aloud is only 15 lines of copy, or 150 words. that is something i have never really been taught before. in fact, i feel that i have been taught very little in the broadcast aspect, and i hope that that changes soon. perhaps i've been so drawn to print because it's all i have really known for the past three semesters.
i hope that i can get pulled back into the broadcast world, i feel as though i've been slipping out.
first off, i am a very conversation writer. and i believe that i write better when there is not much structure to have to worry about and the thoughts can just flow onto the paper. i really like the fact that broadcast writing is this way.
i would much rather turn on my television set than open a newspaper. there is just no comparison to getting that visualization of the news. i like the simplicity of broadcast, the way it is easy to pass on, and how words and pictures can be used to compliment one another.
one handy thing that i read in this chapter is the format of writing a broadcast piece. and that a minute of news read aloud is only 15 lines of copy, or 150 words. that is something i have never really been taught before. in fact, i feel that i have been taught very little in the broadcast aspect, and i hope that that changes soon. perhaps i've been so drawn to print because it's all i have really known for the past three semesters.
i hope that i can get pulled back into the broadcast world, i feel as though i've been slipping out.
Monday, November 5, 2007
chapter 18 + some interesting websites = invesitagtive reporting
out of all aspects of journalism we have talked about thus far, i believe that investigative journalism is my favorite. i am naturally a nosy person. i love getting into people's business and finding the truth in most situations. especially when it's people i know.
i have recently been presented with a story i would like to do a little of my own investigative reporting on. the causes of autism. has anyone else noticed the spike in the amount of kids diagnosed with minor to severe autism in this new generation? one theory that i find very interesting is that it could be due to what is now called the thiomersal controversy. basically, there used to be mercury in each shot that was injected to a body (used as a preservative) and this could be the cause of the rise in autism. talk about potential law suits!
while i aim to find out more on that story on my own, i will look at the process that i need to go through according to the text.
i have already gone through the sniff stage, my story search is done. now it's time for serious investigating to begin. hello wikipedia. honestly, it has a lot of information on thiomersal. and while i tried to search 'autism' and 'mercury in vaccines' on the website, nothing came up. its hard to rely on the internet for a source, because you can never be sure that everything you read is completely truthful. and, as the book states, accuracy is tres tres importante! "check and double-check. there is no good excuse for an error."
i like the pushiness of investigative reporting. i feel like the people who work as investigative reporters should get a lot of respect when they weasel a story out of a source. it's harder than it seems.
on another note, i never realized there were SO many different types of public records. property records, loan records, minutes and transcripts. along with that, there are nonpublic reocords, which are not always impossible to obtain, just a lot more difficult.
i found it interesting that investigative reporting is the most expensive type of reporting. and that these reporters are normally the best-paid. now the idea of an investigative reporter is even more tempting.
i have recently been presented with a story i would like to do a little of my own investigative reporting on. the causes of autism. has anyone else noticed the spike in the amount of kids diagnosed with minor to severe autism in this new generation? one theory that i find very interesting is that it could be due to what is now called the thiomersal controversy. basically, there used to be mercury in each shot that was injected to a body (used as a preservative) and this could be the cause of the rise in autism. talk about potential law suits!
while i aim to find out more on that story on my own, i will look at the process that i need to go through according to the text.
i have already gone through the sniff stage, my story search is done. now it's time for serious investigating to begin. hello wikipedia. honestly, it has a lot of information on thiomersal. and while i tried to search 'autism' and 'mercury in vaccines' on the website, nothing came up. its hard to rely on the internet for a source, because you can never be sure that everything you read is completely truthful. and, as the book states, accuracy is tres tres importante! "check and double-check. there is no good excuse for an error."
i like the pushiness of investigative reporting. i feel like the people who work as investigative reporters should get a lot of respect when they weasel a story out of a source. it's harder than it seems.
on another note, i never realized there were SO many different types of public records. property records, loan records, minutes and transcripts. along with that, there are nonpublic reocords, which are not always impossible to obtain, just a lot more difficult.
i found it interesting that investigative reporting is the most expensive type of reporting. and that these reporters are normally the best-paid. now the idea of an investigative reporter is even more tempting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)