California law impacts journalists

By MELANIE MARTINEZ

The governor of California, Jerry Brown, has recently signed a law that expands protections for journalists.

It reigns in the control of federal prosecutors by giving journalists a five days’ notice before they serve the reporters subpoenas on their records, so that they cannot leak them to the media.

This way, the government agencies’ ability to seize journalists’ records is substantially curbed. They must first give a notice to reporters and news organizations before seeking a subpoena of journalistic information. This information refers to that of a third party, such as internet service providers and cell phone companies.

This law comes about after the Justice Department’s investigation of leaks about a Yemen conspiracy to bomb a U.S. airliner in 2012. The government’s agents had seized phone records from the Associated Press without first notifying them.

In July the Justice Department pledged to notify news organizations if a subpoena on information is being sought.

Here in Florida, the government has existing shield laws and court-recognized privileges  for journalists and the media.

Although this a law enacted in California, an action like this affects the country as a whole and the journalists who report and write in it.

As seen throughout American history, when one state enacts a law, it says something about the state of the country and its policies as a whole.

The United States, though it is a democratic country with freedoms of press and speech, it ranks as low as 47th in the world by the Press Freedom Index created by Reporters Without Borders.

Though the California law mirrors the new media regulations put in place at the federal level, concerns over the way the Occupy protests were handled and the fact that the First Amendment is being taken for granted mean our government must keep moving towards total press freedom.

The Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment in order for Americans to be able to truly express themselves and seek truth and righteousness from our government. As Americans, we can never lose sight of that.

As Abraham Lincoln implored in his Gettysburg Address, the world “can never forget what they did here.”

The only way we can have a truly free democracy is if we have a truly free press, existing sans restrictions that prohibit the public from knowing the truth in order to spark debate and have a government by the people, for the people.

Motorcyclists incident caught on video

By ALEXANDRA SILVER

The concept of sharing the roadway with bikers has always been difficult to grasp for most drivers on the road. Motorcyclists, just like other drivers, must follow the “rules of the road” but we still find many cyclists breaking the law.

On Sept. 29, a man named Alexian Lein was driving on Manhattan’s West Side highway in a Range Rover with both his wife and 2-year-old daughter when they were slowed by hundreds of motorcyclists.

The incident has attracted national and international news media attention because there was video of the incident and it is being replayed countless times as part of coverage of the story. It’s another example of the pervasiveness of video today and how it impacts our ability to see and to understand dangerous moments such as this one.

Lein was waiting patiently as the motorcyclists fooled around, holding up traffic for no apparent reason. As Lein attempted to get past the cyclists, he accidentally hit one of the motorcycles and continued to drive away. This prompted the hundreds of cyclists to follow his vehicle until he was at a red light.

In a matter of minutes, a cyclist bashed the driver’s window with his helmet and proceeded to attack Lein, breaking his leg, but leaving his wife and daughter unharmed.

This situation is particularly frightening, seeing as Lein was simply trying to protect his family and the motorcyclists continued to threaten and eventually injure him. They proceeded to destroy property and cause physical harm in front of both his wife and daughter.

Police are now investigating the incident and two of the cyclists have already been arrested. Another cyclist that was struck by the SUV is now paralyzed and the charges against him have been dropped.

Despite the fact that Lein should have been cautious of the cyclists, he was threatened and any father’s first reaction would be to protect their loved ones when they are in need.

Blogging vs. Journalism

By VALERIA VIERA

The talk Jay Rosen did about “The Twisted Psychology of Bloggers vs. Journalists” relates to how blogging and using the Internet to share stories is a whole new scenario, that’s actually interrupting journalists’ work.

“Work lives have been disrupted by the Internet. There’s an attraction there,” he says.

My point of view in this matter was supported when I read the words of an editor’s column in an Australian newspaper:

“The great thing about newspapers is that, love us or hate us, we’re the voice of the people. We represent the community, their views, their aspirations and their hopes. Bloggers, on the other hand, represent nothing. They whinge, carp and whine about our role in society, and yet they contribute nothing to it, other than satisfying their juvenile egos.”

This expresses reality and, for me, the complete truth. Yes, bloggers are going to be a constant problem in our society, but, after all, news is news and the newspapers are the ones going to inform citizens and the community in a way that doesn’t judge, that tells the truth, that’s reliable and remains a place where opinions don’t interfere, like in blogs. When you finish reading this contribution, you can choose which side, bloggers or journalists, or better, just understand where each one stands.

For me, journalists are the ones who have to go out there, have the experience, be in the situation (sometimes), so later on they can go and write the objective story. Bloggers just talk and write opinions (most of the time negative) about the news that have already occurred and told by the press. And if they do report original news, a lot of times it is not true, causing people to believe things that did not actually happen. Obviously, this can cause a lot of problems.

“I’ve said that bloggers and journalists are each others’ ideal “other.”

This sentence also grabbed my attention. I would say bloggers and journalists have a competition where, in fact, journalists have a fear of being replaced by these new individuals.

It is a new competition that, through the Internet, is overcoming the role of the press or, better yet, like was stated in The Introduction, the press itself is being absorbed into the media.

Peace journalism is great idea, in theory

By MARISSA YOUNG

In my Freedom of Expression class at the University of Miami, we have been discussing peace journalism.  Advocates for peace journalism recognize that today’s media are too eager to focus on violence and tend to favor what they consider to be the victimized parties and assign blame to the “others.”

Peace journalism attempts to give everyone a voice and expose untruths on all sides, while promoting peace and reconciliation instead of war and violence.

In this style of writing, journalists are not supposed to use words like “terrorists,” as these words are considered demonizing language. Instead, they are supposed to call groups by what they call themselves, like al-Qaeda.

Our assignment was to find articles and rank them according to a peace journalism rubric.  As I read through articles, I realized how difficult it would be to adhere to the peace journalism standards. For example, “murdered” has negative and obviously violent connotations, but what else are you supposed to say if that’s what happened? Saying that a man “killed” somebody may have a little less of a negative connotation, but the connotation is there nonetheless.

I agree that an author should make every effort to quote or at least talk to and write about all parties involved and I do think that in many cases this can be done better than it is done now. Sometimes, though, it may be too dangerous.

Should journalists have to reach out to a group that just bombed a civilian’s house? And how are they supposed to talk about this incident without victimizing the civilian? I’m not sure how peace journalism advocates would answer these questions, although it seems to me that the rubric is arbitrary; the person rating an article can interpret the categories and define them however he or she chooses.

One part of the peace journalism rubric is “writer advocates for one side/position.”  (A score of three indicates deviance from the peace journalism philosophy.) This is where peace journalism contradicts itself: it says that authors should be objective, but one of its main goals is to promote peace and reconciliation rather than violence.  Even peace journalism has its own agenda and is inherently biased.

I believe that peace journalism is a noble concept, but it is impractical. It is an unattainable ideal, but we can at least shift toward it, combining some ideas, like less thirst for blood and more open-mindedness, with traditional reporting styles.

Is news a dieter’s friend or enemy?

By REBECCA COHEN

Endless stories with wavering opinions on the newest, best way to lose weight are reported daily.

However, the information that is disclosed is never finite and usually contradicts previous reports by that same news source.

Among the most popular amidst ever-changing diet tips are super foods.

On Huffington Post’s “Healthy Living” page, it features avocados as one of its brain super foods; however, on the same page, it tells dieters to avoid the vegetable altogether.

And don’t get me started on the news reports on breakfast.

News reports are so unreliable that dieting reports should consider discontinuing, considering dieting tips are not newsworthy in the first place.

However, does this fluctuating information simply mirror the rest of news?

Reports about the country’s financial status, governmental status and presidential status are constantly changing. The problem with the media is that, alike the American people, it cannot make up its mind.

So, for now, the government is shut down, we should not eat carbs at breakfast and should never allow an avocado into our bodies.

But this could all change by tomorrow.

Meter model is newspaper’s best bet

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

The Dallas Morning News recently had to take down its paywall for online digital subscribers because it turned out that it wasn’t doing as well as managers thought it would.

At first, publisher Jim Moroney stated that the paywall would only hinder the paper.

That was in 2009.

After putting the paywall into effect in 2011, Moroney then stated in 2012 that the paywall was “very satisfying” and that it drew many subscribers in the first year. In May of this year, Moroney decided to input a meter model, like the one that The New York Times has previously adopted. This is where a certain number of articles are available for free but then after the monthly limit is reached, readers must pay a subscription to see additional articles.

As it turns out, the copy-cat attempt flopped.

In my opinion, it’s interesting to see how newspapers are having to adjust to the digital age. Since print newspapers are not doing as well as before in creating revenue, newspaper companies have to find new ways of gaining income.

What this paper did wrong was that it input a hard paywall that barely allowed articles to be seen for free and THEN put a model meter after.

Other papers are struggling with this same dilemma. Paywalls seem unreasonable,  especially when there are ways of getting news for free, but when it comes to these small papers, they have to make sure some type of money is coming in for their online news services. I agree that paywalls are completely necessary for the journalism world these days. Unfortunately, these smaller papers are not The New York Times and have to be more efficient to maintain their profits.

Other papers need to just follow what The New York Times did. It’s a much more larger and more popular newspaper. They set the standard for every other paper, in a sense.  Constantly changing the strategy of your online newspaper’s website is not a good marketing idea.

Original article found here: http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/the_dallas_morning_news_drops.php

China’s journalists and the government

By REBECCA FERNANDEZ

Tensions are flaring between China’s journalists and government officials after the Southern Weekend newspaper took a stand against government censorship. Recent protests against the nation’s long-standing government involvement in the press launched what many are referring to as the Beijing News incident.

It all began when the New Year’s issue of a Guangdong province newspaper, Southern Weekend, printed a piece by the local propaganda minister that ran without the knowledge of any of the editors. This was the final straw for several of the newspaper’s employees who, up to that point, had been obeying China’s censorship laws by not running pieces that the government had asked them to pull from print.

Southern Weekend’s fed-up editors publicly spoke out on Chinese microblogging site Weibo, claiming that the article allegedly written by Tuo Zhen, a provincial-level official, was “raping” the newspaper’s independence. The post went viral and was eventually taken down, but that hasn’t stopped a flow of criticism against China’s censorship laws.

The most recent backlash occurred when officials answered Southern Weekend’s plea for less government involvement with increased censorship and additional propaganda.

Another article was written, however. It was not as easy for officials to get news outlets to run the article this time around. Officials issued an order to several newspapers nationwide to run the article Tuesday, but only a handful followed through. However, newspapers like the Beijing News, who chose not to run it on Tuesday, were forced to do so the following day. The Beijing News did not give in easily and caved only when authorities physically arrived at its offices.

What really happened at the Beijing News office is still unclear, but several posts on Twitter said that the Weibo accounts of Beijing News employees were all deleted. Alleged photos of a chaotic Beijing News newsroom also made its way through Twitter.

One Beijing News employee, who chose to remain anonymous, confirmed that there was a meeting of administrative-level employees Wednesday morning.

If Dai’s resignation is confirmed, this will likely be the most defiant act a newspaper leader has taken in response to the recent Southern Weekend situation.

Weibo, China’s version of Twitter, has blocked all chatter on the Southern Weekend situation, as well as of the Beijing News incident, but that has not stopped Chinese sources from getting the news out.

News leaks could be threat to security

By DANIELLE COHEN

Reporters are responsible for making information and news accessible. Sometimes, the information that may be newsworthy might not be safe to share as public knowledge.

A prime example of reporters leaking information that is not safe to share has happened recently and has put our country’s security as risk.

There was a report made by the McClatchy DC news service Washington bureau chief about how “odd” a story was on the front-page of The New York Times.

James Asher, the Washington bureau chief for McClatchy, made this statement in regards to a leak that took place in the beginning of August regarding the closing of 19 embassies that stirred media chaos.

McClatchy at the time supported publishing the details, which included intercepted communication between the Al Qaeda Leader Ayman al Zawahiri and Yemen AQAP head Nasir al Wuhayshi.

Other sources, such as The New York Times, decided it would be beneficial to hold back publishing this information and honor the government’s request. The Times did report communication involving “senior operatives of Al Qaeda,” but did not release any identities.

The evening of the release of The Times story , a Yemen expert explained “that an August leak regarding an Al Qaeda plot undermined U.S. intelligence gathering as — laughable.”

Now that it is about two months later, U.S officials who request anonymity told The Times that the leak promoted terrorists to change their methods of communication.

There are reports that this news leak damaged national security.

The Huffington Post stated that the U.S. government never raised concerns following the story released on Aug. 4 and that “multiple sources inside and outside of the Yemeni government confirmed our reporting and not one of them told us not to publish the facts.”

Gregory Johnsen, a Yemen expert and author of a book on al Qaida in Yemen, made the point that the U.S. publicly closed 19 embassies and that the facts about Wuhayshi and Zawhiri were known in Yemen.  The point she made was once the government leaks something, the information is hard to control.

We are unsure if our government is investigating the source of these leaks. We do know that the FBI and the office of the director of National Intelligence refused to speak about the subject. The Times also did not contribute and did not contact McClatchy for information.

For more information visit http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-calderone/mcclatchy-new-york-times-al-qaeda-leak_b_4022429.html?utm_hp_ref=media