The latest Internet news hoax

By GABRIELLA SHOFER

Over the weekend, news reports surfaced detailing the arrest of the renowned graffiti artist, Banksy. The online news reports were very detailed, referencing sources and being displayed on reputable news websites. In order to cement their credibility and the authenticity of articles, news reporters utilized multiple sources and a traditional news layout to provide information to readers. Thus, I was not prompted to question the authenticity of the article that was published on the U.S. website National Report.

The article gained heightened traction as it spread through social media over the weekend. The prank managed to convince thousands of social media users, with his name trending on both Twitter and Facebook. The reports claimed that the pseudonymous British street artist, whose graffiti artworks have appeared around the world and often have an underlying political motive, was charged by London’s Metropolitan Police for vandalism and his identity was revealed. However, these reports were falsified on Monday morning when the artist’s publicist, Jo Brooks, confirmed that the arrest was a hoax.

This story conjures a number of critical issues that currently plague the news industry, particularly in relation to the online nature through which many individuals now receive their news. It brings forward the question of the role of social media in spreading the news in a truthful manner. With many people relying on social media and the Internet as a source of news information, it is increasingly frightening for society the more that these types of fake articles emerge.

As more reports have developed that reinforce that the original article was a hoax, the increasing difficulty for readers in determining which sources they can trust is ever-present. Is it the readers’ responsibility to check the sources quoted in articles? It appears that this is the only way to ensure that the news we are reading is accurate, yet this is impossible for every reader to execute. Instead we will continue to trust the news outlets that provide us with the latest information on activities around the world.

Perhaps we just need to remain aware and look out for any possible fabrications before wholeheartedly believing what we read.

Jameis Winston is a person, too

By DYLAN WEEMS

This weekend’s Saturday night football game between the Notre Dame Fighting Irish and the Florida State Seminoles drew a television rating of 8.5, the highest of the season. This beat last year’s Florida State versus Clemson game by 130 percent.

Obviously a top 5 match-up between these two storied teams will naturally draw attention, especially due to the playoff implications. However, the massive ratings boost came largely due to ESPN’s coverage of the polarizing Florida State Quarterback Jameis Winston.

Winston has been in the spotlight recently and it isn’t because of his Heisman Trophy or his ability to win, it’s because of his off-field troubles.

Winston has come under fire for multiple allegations beginning with his alleged rape case in 2012 and most recently for allegedly taking money for autographs.

It is safe to say that ESPN has had a lot to talk about, but the analysts seem to be becoming biased. The sentiment among the masses is that the ESPN panel loves the SEC and wants to see Florida State fail so that they can tear into the FSU quarterback more while also touting the greatness of the Southeastern Conference.

I feel that fans need to understand that every time ESPN shows a picture of Winston in his FSU uniform, they are advertising for the school. Winston is undefeated in his past two years as the Florida State quarterback. That brings positive attention to the school despite his off-field antics.

The point is this: Winston is innocent until proven guilty and although Florida State may not have handled his investigations in the most timely or thorough manner, he should not be ridiculed by the media simply because he wins.

Whether he committed either crime that I mentioned above, I cannot say. What I can say is that it is unfair for the media to will Jameis Winston to be a criminal just so that his football team can lose. It’s just a game.

Adrian Peterson back in spotlight

By SHAWNA KHALAFI

On Wednesday, Minnesota Vikings Adrian Peterson had a court appearance at Montgomery County, Texas, courthouse for his arraignment following his recent child abuse case. Peterson is out on $15,000 bond since he was indicted last month of child abuse for spanking his 4-year-old son with a wooden switch.

Before getting a urinalysis drug test, he allegedly admitted to the employee administering the test that he “smoked a little weed” while on bond, therefore violating the terms of his bond. The district attorney’s office wrote: “In light of this statement, and the fact that it was made during the urinalysis testing process, and the term ‘weed’ is a common slang term for marijuana, the state argues that the defendant has smoked marijuana while on bond.”

Adrian Peterson has been in the spotlight for weeks now and not in a positive way. His child abuse case involving his son sparked a swarm of media attention and scrutiny. This scandal has gone the same way in just two days.

On ESPN’s Mike and Mike, two completely different perspectives on the situation are expressed. Mike Golic argued that it was just a stupid decision made by Peterson. He talks about how everyone always wants to tie these stupid decisions to bigger issues and reasons, such as serious addictions or frequent concussions.

Mike Greenberg argued that Peterson has probably been getting away with smoking weed, among other things, for most of his life as a star football player. Mike says that because of this early pattern, lots of athletes, Peterson includes, adopted the mindset that the rules don’t apply to them.

Georgia star suspended indefinitely

By MICHELLE BERTRAN

According to recent rankings, Todd Gurley was a front runner to win the Heisman trophy this year, but that’s probably out of reach for Gurley now that he violated NCAA rules.

It appears to be that Todd Gurley was charging $8 to $25 for his autograph through the company James Spence Authentication (JSA). It was over 500 items that he signed, which included more than 300 jerseys, more than 30 mini-helmets, more than 70 photos and even 10 baseballs, and nine Nike cleats.

As stated on sbnation.com, university officials found out through an e-mail that was sent to them by an autograph dealer. The e-mail read:

I have video of Todd Gurley doing a private autograph signing ***. He has been paid thousands of dollars for his stuff over the last 18 months. I personally paid him for this signing on the video. I have bought and sold game used equipment from him.

I want no compensation. Just want someone to leak this story that’s deserving. If you have any interest, give me a call or email. I attached a photo of him in my car signing a mini helmet that I just sold last week on my eBay store.

All I ask is some privacy until we can touch base.

I live on Georgia and would crucified if my name was released.

The video is about 5 minutes long but doesn’t show the money exchange.

My cell is **********

I believe this would be the lead story on sports center if ESPN got their hands on this. Hope to hear from you soon.

As of today, Georgia is no longer selling Gurley No. 3 jerseys on its official website. Gurley holds a school record of 293 all-purpose yards in their season-opener against Clemson, which they won. He also only needed 86 yards in order to pass Garrison Hearst for second place on Georgia’s all-time rushing yards list of 3,147 yards.

According to ESPN, Gurley might not be cleared by the end of the season. However, he is only a junior and could still have one more year to play.

Press-government relations turning sour

By SHIVANI ALURU

James Risen’s thought-provoking analysis of the United States’ approach to war and the face of American democracy today lends itself nicely to discussion of journalism in today’s political climate.

As the U.S. becomes increasingly committed to fighting a war on terror, despite a lack of consistent and clear motives from a mutable enemy, American reporters must become increasingly aware of the risks associated with reporting against the government.

Despite the noble nature of journalism, the purity of the ideal journalist’s motives leaves them open to corruption. The goals of disseminating truth and educating the public are so easily affected by outside forces that anything from money to fear could affect a reporter and warp the presentation of news. As the U.S. places more importance on public safety and the goal of protecting the nation from a terrorist attack, we lose the already established rights of freedom of speech and press. The inverse relationship between the two is unsettling to say the least.

Risen is a reporter familiar with the U.S. government’s encroachment on press rights. After publishing his book “State of War” in 2006, Risen has been hounded continuously by the U.S. Justice Department to reveal sources and testify against a variety of people who leaked government secrets.

To his credit, Risen has firmly protected his sources and has refused to break the trust afforded to him by his profession. Despite threatened action of varying degrees of severity by the U.S. government, Risen has stayed strong and protected a key aspect of reporting.

By guaranteeing confidentiality to a source, journalists are able to access deeper pools of information, as well as facts and rumors that would not have otherwise seen the light of day. These benefits allow reporters to simply do their job better, and explore and expose various organizations with a greater degree of nuance and success.

The U.S. government’s crackdown on reporters bodes poorly for the future of freedom of speech. By prioritizing round-the-clock safety, the rights the U.S. was founded on suffer, and citizens not only lose essential, inalienable powers, but also a sense of history and identity as Americans.

At the risk of placing journalists on a pedestal, this group of professionals represents the front line of protecting basic rights. It has become crucial for reporters to weigh their professional action against their patriotic instinct and it is job where the line between right and wrong is almost completely blurred.

Biased reporting in age of objectivity

By KATHERINE FERNANDES

Media have an enormous power in modifying our cultural and political thoughts. Although the news media have the obligation to be accurate and fair, biased reporting occurs.

Bias reporting refers to the bias within the mass media in the way that events and stories are told.

Media can have a hostile effect on viewers, readers and listeners. We are not as smart as we think we are and we can be unconsciously convinced to view things in a certain way portrayed by the media.

Government influence, recruited staff, intended audience and the ownership of the news source are some of the factors that can lead to bias.

The things we need to consider when we read news are the source’s race, age and gender, stereotypes and the point of view in which a news story is reported.

For instance, if an article has many government sources and few sources from the community, it might be biased toward a political view.

We also need to consider the diversity of people included in the article. This includes race, sexual orientation, gender and age.

Stereotypes is another thing to consider. An article might be focusing on black people as possible suspects of a crime because “most crimes include black people.” Is the writer defending white people just because he has adopted bad thoughts of this specific type of individuals? What if the offenders were of white color?

As journalists, maybe we are not biased toward a certain point of view. Nevertheless, our story can be biased if we ignore some details and include others. For example, if someone is covering a story about a protest and ignores information about the people that are against the protest. Of course, this gives the readers a different opinion about the event.

When writing we should consider different type of sources to have a story that is influenced by the attitudes and background of different kind of people, not only by a certain group with particular thoughts and beliefs.

Investigative reporting … going extinct?

By DOMENICA A. LEONE

Investigative journalism and reporting is a broad realm within the industry, which through the years has certainly awarded various media enterprises acknowledged social prestige. It was for example, thanks to the whole Watergate scandal, that The Washington Post made a name out of it, but also Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein; the reporters, for uncovering the espionage plot organized by the White House and reelection committee of Richard Nixon, received a Pulitzer Price.

However, such detailed and well fabricated throughout subject analysis are hard to find today. The newspaper industry, which is undergoing various crises and evolution, such as budget constraints, evolving technologies and an overall decline in the readers, pose threats and difficulties to continue exercising what is undoubtedly an exhaustive research work.

Since the advent of the Internet, news media have clearly undergone drastic changes in their financial structures and, of course, we all know what happens when there’s a budget problem. The first thing you get rid off is that which is the most expensive. Unfortunately, this decision is terminating valuable investigative work as well as professionals in the business.

Certainly, journalism is also being changed by the influences of the times in which we live: social media and global communication among them. It seems to me that journalists now just report the most “relevant” issues based on convenience or comfort. And I say this because it is evident how news media enterprises now rely on a much more “citizen” approach when it comes to producing content such as photographs or on-the-scene video for generating revenues. (Spoiler alert: Yes! They make use of social media for finding out what to report about as well as what is it that you want to hear about.)

Voiced by the audience’s perspectives and targeted to the populous interests, the model might come across not only attractive but efficient as it evidently makes the research process less costly and time consuming. The big question is, though, does this represent a disadvantage for consumers of everyday informative sources?

Are we losing our creative thinkers? Problem solvers? Our hungry curious professionals that will likely take an event and further develop it into a story? Or we might as well just hear only facts happening worldwide for the rest of our lives.

The age of 24-hour news filler

By AUDREY WINKELSAS

News used to be delivered in the form of daily newspapers. First with cable television and increasingly so with the Internet, coverage has become nonstop. 24-hour news channels are constantly on the air. Ironically, as Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, authors of “Warp Speed,” comment, news is delivered less completely as a result of 24-hour coverage because stories are now often presented in little pieces interspersed with speculation.

The concept of newsgathering is becoming distorted. What once valued significance and thoroughness becomes a waiting game with superficial filler. This is heightened by the desire to be broadcast live. Reporters may stand around waiting for breaking news to occur.  As Richard Sambrook and Sean McGuire at theguardian.com noted, “when a presenter feels compelled to say, ‘Plenty more to come … none of it news … but that won’t stop us,’” while waiting for the royal birth in 2013, “then there really is a problem.”

This deterioration is further driven by the desire to be first. The Internet enables videos and other forms of communication to be transmitted instantly. It is a race between channels to be the first to air breaking news. This has ethical implications since speed often correlates with inaccuracy. The traditional function of journalism, which is to share true, reliable accounts, is sometimes replaced by journalism in which the information is published before being verified.

Not all inaccuracies can be easily erased. Such was a case with the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing. The media repeatedly misreported information in the rush to share new discoveries. In addition to erroneously reporting 12 dead, The New York Post linked Salah Barhoun to the attack. The innocent 17-year-old was featured front page as one of two “bag men,” suggesting that he was a suspect in the bombing. You can imagine the toll this false accusation took on his reputation, which may follow him throughout his life.

A look at the Hong Kong protesters

By XUANCHEN FAN

Since Oct. 1, Hong Kong Protesters have been gathered for a rally. Apparently, democratic Hong Kong is not pleased with the current political situation. All of this has gained international and global news media attention.

So, these days, many people have asked me about my opinion toward Hong Kong. And people want to learn what is really going on in Hong Kong.

In my opinion, the citizens in Hong Kong are a little excessive on the political issue. As a financial center in Asia, Hong Kong is abundant and the environment is quite comfortable for living. For students, the University of Hong Kong is one of the best colleges around Asia.

Many Hong Kong residents maintain that Chinese government is not fair to them. The Chinese government in Beijing has overseen Hong Kong since 1997. For example, Disney World originally was planned for Shanghai. However, in an effort to promote Hong Kong’s economic development, it was built in Hong Kong instead. Shanghai is only now, 17 years later, getting its own Disney park.

Some economists even calculated that if the government used the money which develop Hong Kong to develop the north of China, the north of China would be as advanced as Shanghai nowadays.

Taking a parallel comparison with Macao, another special administrative region of China, Macao was impoverished at the beginning of 21st century. Few people in Macao were capable to use telephone back that time. Nonetheless, they focused on development and constructions for Macao’s economy.

Even though the Chinese government never did anything special for Macao, people never heard that Macao residents were dissatisfied with government policies. Now, Macao is the “Asian Las Vegas” and succeeding by its own efforts.

Standing with a citizen’s point of view, Hong Kong residents should be satisfied with the current situation and use their vigor for something meaningful instead of rallies on the streets.

We need to be fact checking photos, too

By LINDSAY THOMPSON

Part of being a journalist is knowing how to check your facts before you publish an article stating that the facts are true. You make sure they came from a reliable source and, if possible, that other sources agree with this information.

But how do you check the credibility of a photo you want to publish? Do you even need to?

“A pictures worth a thousand words,” the expression goes. So, photos should be showing you what the facts are, because it’s right there on the screen for you to see. However, digital photography and Photoshop are making it nearly impossible to find a photo that has not been edited in some way.

Correcting color, brightness, contrast and other technical details is expected of photographers. These details, however, do not impact the content of the photo, just the quality.

Now, it is so easy for anyone with basic Photoshop skills to edit in something that was not originally there, or erase something that was. This makes it extremely difficult to tell what is real and what is exaggerated.

If you publish a photo that has been altered, you are supposed to specify that the content has been changed, but is it really possible to regulate that? If you find a free domain image you want to attach onto an article, how do you know if it has been altered?

The digital age is making it easier to share and show what’s going on all over the world, but it is also making it harder to believe our own eyes.

Should we be watching news or fluff?

By EMILY JOSEPH

While watching the 6 a.m. news today, I noticed how much of the newscasts, particularly local newscasts, are filled with edited packaged stories. These are stories that are prepared in advance and are not time sensitive, including interviews, event features and pieces that require less in-depth journalism.

Essentially, they could air any time that week probably.

While these are nice additions to news shows and can lighten up a hard news day, should they actually be classified as “news”? At 6 a.m. I saw a story about the new Trader Joe’s opening and one about a new store at Disney where children can go for “Frozen” makeovers (like the characters from the movie “Frozen”).

Not only are these features very “fluffy,” but they seem to take up more time in a 30-minute newscast than hard news or breaking news stories. I understand and accept that the morning news shows (“Today,” “Good Morning America,” and so forth) are usually a combination of feature and hard news, but now that local news is following that path, I think enough is enough.

Some people only have 30 minutes in the morning to watch the news and I don’t think hearing about the new Trader Joe’s is at the top of their lists of concerns.

News should be for everyone

By DYLAN WEEMS

The local television news is suffering. I’m not entirely sure what happened to it, either.

Out of a 22-minute newscast, it feels like 20 of them are reporting “who was killed where?” To me, that isn’t news at all. The newsworthy part is whether or not the person who did it is still loose or in custody.

I think it is more than a little ridiculous that, when someone is killed, reporters interview the family about how they feel. Obviously they are all upset, but their loss does not have an effect on the majority of the community.

I will admit that this sounds incredibly cold-hearted. However, in my view, local news should be spending a lot more time on the policies of local government or reporting about the status of small businesses in the area. These are things that concern everyone living in the area of the broadcast and should be treated as such.

Taking the time to explain everything to the community can only help in the long run. The policy that “if it bleeds, it leads” needs to change, at least locally. This also goes back to fear mongering. It makes people believe that the community is in worse shape than it is in reality. I’m not saying that the news should absolutely ignore crime news, but I am saying that it shouldn’t take up the majority of the news.

There needs to be a higher standard.

Infographics help tell the story

By GABRIELLA SHOFER

News reporting does not just mean providing the facts.

News reporters are responsible for providing factual information about events occurring in the world in an easily comprehensible manner. All too often, news reports complicate the matter further, distorting the public’s perception of the issue at hand.

A particularly relevant example of this is the reporting on the spread of the Ebola virus, that has been covered by the media during the past month. Updates about the disease are continually reported, however, instead of providing information about the disease, many of the articles are written in a way that increases fear in the public about the disease and how it can affect them.

However, a recent notable exception was the The New York Times article that provided more in depth information about the disease, particularly through the use of infographics. Aptly titled, Q & A, the article refutes rumors about the scale of the outbreak of Ebola around the world by using a question and answer format.

The graphic answers the most common questions that are currently being asked about Ebola and provides simplified explanations about the science behind the disease. This format demonstrates the fundamental principle of news reporting in informing the public, rather than providing misleading information that complicates the situation through the use of scientific jargon.

Answers to the questions are further enhanced through the use of graphs, tables, timelines and diagrams, which clarify the situation for the reader. By presenting the facts in this way, The New York Times illustrates the situation in a more clear and concise manner and ensures that readers are informed.

While creating these visual representations of the facts and figures is time consuming, it ultimately provides a more valuable news report for the public while simultaneously foregrounding the publication’s position as a reputable source of information.

Site exposes false facts online

By MEAGHAN McCLURE

The Internet is possibly the easiest place to spread rumors and false facts.

News stories that have incorrect information are easily transmitted online, social media sites like Twitter allow rumors to go viral extraordinarily fast, and above all, few Internet users actually check to confirm what they’re reading is, in fact, true.

A new website, however, may change all of this.

Emergent.info tracks the most popular stories swirling around the Internet, and deems them true or false.

The website is associated with Columbia University’s Tow Center for Digital Journalism. According to the website, it “aims to develop the best practices for debunking misinformation.”

On the site’s homepage there is the list of rumors, along with their status – true, false, or unverified. The site also displays how many times that story was shared, essentially its popularity, and a further breakdown of how the story was spread if you click on it.

In general, the concept seems like a great idea. It exposes sources for misinformation and falsehoods, therefore further inspiring the Internet to be more credible. The website is a good start for digital journalism, to put more responsibility on journalists to make sure their information is correct and to double-check their sources. Although the website mainly focuses on absurd rumors now, hopefully it will extend to all news sources and in more depth in the future. But for now, it’s a great addition in the credibility of digital journalism.

Visit the website here: http://www.emergent.info/

Crackdown on China’s journalists

By GABRIELLA CANAL

Journalism is a scary field of work — there’s no doubt. The beheadings, the war zones, the crossfire, these are all frightening aspects I’ve discussed before. But it’s been a while since I’ve thought about what journalism is in other countries. Learning how to become a journalist in the United States has made me blissfully unaware of the fact that media control is still prevalent today — and just as scary as other aspects of the job.

China is currently facing stricter laws in news media control, forcing some journalists to go underground. Before the days of the open-door policy, China’s ignorance was a blessing and a curse. Nowadays, with access to social media and essentially foreign news and controversies, leaders are yearning to go back to the way it once was.

The recent protests taking up the front pages of every notable newspaper are about China’s imposing limits on voting reforms in Hong Kong. This summer, China began imposing strict regulations on what journalists can and cannot post on social media in an attempt to isolate domestic media from the rest of the world. The latter is most concerning.

A journalist for the monthly magazine, China Fortune, was forced to quit when he violated the government’s new rule by writing commentaries for Orient, a Hong Kong-based news website. His name was Song Zhibiao. Previously, he was forced to resign from an affiliated newspaper when he questioned the government for the 70,000 people who died in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Song criticized the government’s construction of school buildings that may have been the cause for so many children’s deaths and was booted from Southern Metropolis Daily.

Song is not the only one. There are countless other cases that the Committee to Protect Journalists are fighting for (the link provides these outrageous cases: http://cpj.org/asia/china/). And where is the rest of the world’s media standing on this issue? China, a leading state in today’s world, is cracking down on its journalists. In a time where they most need representation, the rest of the world’s media does not properly cover the issue. Journalism, as a way of expression, needs to be protected — no matter the place or time.

So what do we know? The Chinese government fears public opinion. They are successfully trading freedom of expression for control of information. And for a job so heavily dependent on the ability to communicate and criticize openly, I just wonder when the role of the journalist will be null, when the jail cells will be filled with those who’ve been silenced, and most importantly, when the media will say enough is enough.

Ebola scare hits close to home

By MEAGHAN McCLURE

As with any troubling issue, it only really starts to shake you once it hits close to home. This was definitely the case with the Ebola coverage in the news media lately.

Ebola had always had a constant presence in the news media – about the outbreaks in Liberia and other faraway African countries, but it was always one of those news stories on the back-burner. The status of the virus was constantly updated, and although it was always concerning, it was never a major concern for the average American.

However, with the first U.S. case reported in Dallas, news coverage is definitely now telling a different story.

All the major news outlets, like CNN for example, have multiple articles about the deadly spreading of the virus on the front pages and home sites. Once we as the public heard about the Dallas case, there were then talks about other possible cases in the Miami airport and in Washington, D.C.

Now, instead of just hearing how the Ebola virus was affecting different countries in a very general way, we are learning about the victims of Ebola, possible Ebola cases, what the virus is, how it spreads, and so forth. Once the first U.S. case bell was rung, the media jumped on the case, making Ebola possibly one of the most news media-covered stories today.

This just shows how one incident, like the Dallas case, can change how the news media covers a certain topic to accommodate and generate public interest. It also shows the closer a story hits home, the more interest the story will have.

9/11 Memorial fire coverage varies

By SHAWNA KHALAFI

A fire at the Flight 93 National Memorial destroyed three buildings on Friday.

It was really interesting to see how different news outlets handled this event. On most news Web sites, including AOL and Fox, the journalists tried to focus on the positive aspects of the situation. They mentioned that the visitor center and memorial, which are under construction, are two miles away and were untouched by the fire and that nobody was injured.

They also made sure to mention that although about 10 percent of the memorial’s archival collection was there, many objects were in fireproof cases. I think this is a good approach because the memory of 9/11 is still so fragile to many readers.

However, I found it troubling that some of the stories were very vague about what was missing. For example, the Congressional Gold Medal awarded to the memorial last month, has still not been found. There were numerous quotes stating that officials can’t access the storage area until it is cleared by fire officials. The manner in which some of these stories were written was somewhat questionable because it gives readers false hope that they might uncover the medal and other memorabilia.

Leave climate change to the experts

By AUDREY WINKELSAS

Being fair and balanced is a dogma of journalism. But in an attempt to offer balanced reporting, journalists may in fact introduce inaccuracy and deception.

There is a consensus amongst scientists about climate change. According to climate.nasa.gov, 97 percent of scientists believe that global warming trends are the result of human activity.

If journalists feel they must have balance in their stories, who does that leave them to turn to for the opposition? Well, not scientists.

Quoting politicians on the scientific evidence surrounding climate change is committing the fallacy of inappropriate expertise. Rick Santorum remarked that scientific evidence cannot even withstand common sense, sarcastically saying, “man-made carbon dioxide — a gas that humans exhale and plants need to live, a gas that represents less than 0.1 percent of the atmosphere — is a dangerous pollutant threatening to overheat the world.”

The truth is that although in terms of percentages the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is small, it is very potent and even trace amounts can have disastrous effects.

So let’s leave it to the experts. We wouldn’t ask Albert Einstein for commentary on comparative politics, would we?

It is completely acceptable to consult and quote politicians on policy issues and economic issues surrounding global warming. But our discussions with them should stop there.

Media learn to cover marijuana culture

By SHIVANI ALURU

Marijuana, long considered a shameful indulgence reserved for teenagers and overgrown slackers, is going through a profound re-branding process in Colorado. Smokers, rather than being hidden in smoky, black lit basements, are experiencing new life as weed culture becomes the new, trendy frontier in food, fashion and fun.

In the food realm, rumors of secret tasting menus laced with different types of marijuana have set much of the foodie set into a frenzy, with many trying to get invited to back door dinner parties at some of Denver and Boulder’s restaurants, both fine and common.

Similarly, hemp fashion is making its way back in nearly everyone’s wardrobe. Some items are hyper-cool like the woven, Moroccan inspired belts found in the windows of Pearl Street boutiques while others, like t-shirts, are so basic and innocuous, it’s hard to believe they found their origin in a drug.

The easy transition from illegal marijuana to legal recreational marijuana owes a surprising amount of credit to the work of journalists and opinion writers in Colorado and beyond. From High Times in the 1970s to the New York Times editorial board now, the news media have been vocal with their opinions on legalization.

On Oct. 1 the Denver Post closed the application for a weed-based sex and intimacy columnist for The Cannabist, the Denver Post’s marijuana themed site. This push by a mainstream media outlet to incorporate a subculture with a long history is more evidence of journalism’s power. It’s simple to argue that the establishment of The Cannabist will likely inform and educate a demographic previously untouched by the marijuana debate and even soothe those who were staunchly opposed to any and all legalization.

The discussion bears mention simply because of journalism’s power to spin counter and sub cultures into the mainstream. When Rolling Stone’s first issue hit the stands in 1964, its mission was deeply entrenched in the hippie counterculture but every story was written using traditional journalistic principles. Currently, despite its against the tide origins, Rolling Stone has become the most mainstream magazine for both music and political commentary.

It’s the inverse of the relationship between news and social media. Rather than reporters pulling hot topics from the people, the people pull the things they want to talk about from the new. It’s proof that journalism can still propel discussion on its own.

Interactive storytelling, our future

By DOMENICA A. LEONE

Journalism is certainly an industry that is suffering. Not that it will disappear, but the print field is pretty much condemned with a possible execution date. It is interesting how the evolution of the field has paralleled the transformation of society and the modernization of the different technologies. Thus, with the passage of time, it hasn’t been surprising that the industry and its professionals have had to adapt in order to deliver and enhance the value of the product they have to offer.

The New York Times has been extremely successful in doing so. After transitioning to the digital platform as many other newspapers have done as its plan B, the NYT had yet another plan A under its sleeve. The company was clever enough to take advantage of not only the technologies available, but the tools and opportunities the platform had to offer like no one else before. It embarked on a project, which ended up being an overwhelming success, thus changing the way of telling stories and challenging other media enterprises by setting a high standard to look up to.

image[2]“Snowfall” was released in December 2012 and it brought with it everlasting reviews hailing the piece as the future of journalism.

Based on the story of group of skiers and snowboarders trapped beneath an avalanche in Washington state’s Cascade Mountains; the piece is formatted in the form of an eye-popping multimedia feature.  At its peak, reportedly as many as 22,000 users visited “Snow Fall” at the same time. It also received around 2.9 million visits for more than 3.5 million page views.

Unlike a standard online article, which doesn’t diverge much from the original print layout, Snow Fall, a multi-chapter series by features reporter John Branch, it’s a visual feast, which integrates video, photos and graphics in a logical and almost effortless manner.

Screen shot 2014-10-03 at 10.55.08 AMAs you scroll through the various sections of the content you don’t get the feeling that the mix of elements are just tacked on.

The media elements are well planned and placed, embedded in a redundant fashion reinforcing the written statements and even developing further on the facts.

Future or not, it sure turned out to be successful. And people can’t get enough of it.

A few months later, The Washington Post, refusing to be outdone, made ​​his own version of “Snow Fall” with “Cycling’s Road Forward” — a media report of similar characteristics, which featured a young rider named Joe Dombrowski. As with the NYT skiers, Dombrowski’s story surprised by the use of unconventional tools that worked for embellishment and support on the retelling of the events. For example, The Post detailed one of Dombrowski’s training rides near Nice, France, using satellite imagery and explored his ride out of Lance Armstrong’s shadow.