Journalism sways perceptions of crime

By LINDSAY THOMPSON

Pointing fingers is easy and it’s easy for journalism to turn to finger pointing. In the past, American journalists have given countries like Russia and China flack for their high incarceration rates. In reality, the U.S. has the overall highest rate of incarceration per capita in the world. (http://huff.to/1oxID9y).

Not only that, but stories of murders and missing people are all over the news today, and while these stories are certainly newsworthy, they give people the idea that crime is on the rise. Actually, crime in the U.S. has been steadily declining for the past 10 years.

So why do the American people not seem to know these things?

The point of journalism is to inform the public about issues and current events. Incarceration rates in the U.S. is more of an ongoing news story, but it’s still a current event which is rarely talked about.

Crime, on the other hand, is stressed too much, so that the public generally has an incorrect view of what is happening in our country.

I’m not saying journalists shouldn’t report certain things, I think we just need to keep everything in perspective more. Because it’s very difficult to believe that crime rates are dropping, when all you see on the news is another story about a shooting, and it’s hard to believe that we imprison more people per capita than Russia or China when those countries are in the news for how harsh their criminal justice system is.

Since it is the job of journalists to inform the public, I think that some of these facts and statistics I have mentioned should be reported more frequently or updates should be given more frequently, so that the U.S. population has a better idea of how things actually are.

Equal coverage needed for all missing

By AUDREY WINKELSAS

Hannah Graham’s disappearance has opened old wounds. Cassandra Morton disappeared in 2009 but her name didn’t make national headlines the same way Graham’s has.

Just six days after Morton went missing, Morgan Harrington disappeared. Harrington received more news coverage than Morton.

Morton’s stepfather says it’s because Harrington’s family was able to offer a reward for their daughter and because Morton didn’t fit the media’s preferred image.

According to The Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson:

“A damsel must be white. This requirement is nonnegotiable. It helps if her frame is of dimensions that breathless cable television reporters can credibly describe as ‘petite,’ and it also helps if she’s the kind of woman who wouldn’t really mind being called ‘petite,’ a woman with a good deal of princess in her personality. She must be attractive — also nonnegotiable. Her economic status should be middle class or higher…”

Morton came from Tinbridge Hill, a historically black neighborhood. She experimented with drugs and moved around a lot.

Harrington’s parents made television appearances and a website was made to find their daughter. Morton did not receive such attention. Without speaking with both Morton’s and Harrington’s parents, I cannot know the degree to which each family sought coverage and the degree to which the media approached each family to be able to pinpoint the cause of the difference in coverage between the two girls’ disappearances.

In any case, this should serve as a reminder for journalists that content should be dictated by neither aesthetics nor money. We need to strive for fair, unbiased coverage that represents the diversity of our population.

Media, feds play risky name game

By GABRIELLA CANAL

Last week, I think I saw the headline “Ebola crisis” on every station I flipped through, every billboard I whizzed by, every social media newsfeed I scrolled down. The word “crisis” is a red-flag word. It promotes fear, anxiety and ensues widespread panic. It is a word that should not be taken lightly, nor thrown around at ease.

Last week, each time that I tuned into the morning newsroom edition of CNN with Carol Costello, Costello would address the issue as a crisis and the news ticker would dizzily roll by flashing the words: “Ebola crisis.”

Yesterday morning, I routinely turned on CNN to find Costello sassily trying to put things into perspective for the audience. “Let’s put the so-called Ebola crisis in perspective,” Costello said, “there are nearly 319 million people in the U.S. and two people, two, have contracted Ebola. Two.” Two, she emphasized.

“You would think that our lawmakers would point that out so that there is no panic.” She then went on to criticize Tulsi Gabbard, Democratic politician, for petitioning to extend the incubation period for twice the time that the CDC has required.

The whole scenario is an oxymoron. All this finger pointing really should have been redirected at the media. For an entire week, news anchors like CNN’s Costello were labeling this incident as a “crisis,” creating a fiasco out of the situation. All of a sudden, the politicians are completely at fault for blowing up the situation and instilling fear in American homes?

In an industry so reliant on the written and spoken word, word choice is, well, important. It is word choice that can make or break a story, a reporter, and a nation. Certain trigger words should be used with caution and labeling situations should be done so with much thought.

On the other hand, another one of the United States’ greatest and most current events, has yet to be labeled.

After around three months of an onslaught of threats, a handful of decapitations, and the bombing of the Islamic State, the crisis in Syria has yet to be labeled. The effort to contain the Ebola outbreak in West Africa has been named Operation United Assistance. And yet, one of the most pressing issues on US homeland security is a fill-in-the-blank.

Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said there is “an effort under way to consider … a potential name for this operation.”

This name-game that the United States government and media are playing is a dangerous one, as it is ultimately these names (or thereof, lack of names) that will go down in the history books.

Is America prepared to handle Ebola?

By KATHERINE FERNANDES

Being a developed country and a world power, we are not taking the necessary steps to prevent Ebola from spreading throughout the country.

In hospitals, there is lack of coordination including the limited training of staff. Moreover, the overconfidence in American hospitals has been another issue.

One of the so-called “prepared hospitals” missed warning signs of the first Ebola patient Thomas Duncan, who first went showing diarrhea and vomit symptoms in Dallas hospital. By the time Duncan was diagnosed with Ebola, it was too late because two nurses who were taking care of him became infected even though they used the “necessary protecting equipment.”

We are not just talking about three Ebola patients from Dallas. There are other people that have been exposed to these infected people, including a school teacher from Ohio who had contact with one of the nurses.

Wasn’t America all ready for this?

Thomas Frieden, director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said “Ebola poses little risk to the U.S. general population. We know how to stop Ebola with strict infection control practices which are already in widespread use in American hospitals.”

As said before there was an excess of confidence in U.S. hospitals, which suggested nearly every American hospital would be ready to receive Ebola patients. Today, this is not what we are seeing. There are many doubts about the ability of hospitals to handle such patients here in the U.S.

Health officials are only relying on the four “specialized hospitals centers” to treat this virus.

If hospitals in the U.S. were really prepared for this illness, why the two nurses who contracted Ebola in Dallas were transferred to two of the four highly specialized hospitals here? Weren’t the hospitals in such a big state such as Texas prepared to treat Ebola? Probably not.

We should note that the four hospitals equipped to treat patients with Ebola are located in Georgia, Nebraska, Maryland and Montana. They have the capacity to treat approximately 10 patients at one time. What if this disease spreads throughout the country? Only four hospitals in one of the most developed countries in the world would be able to treat Ebola patients?

What if Americans become ill abroad and are brought here for treatment and there is insufficient space in “equipped hospitals” because of people that got infected here?

Nigeria is now Ebola-free. This is an example of a country that took the necessary measures to overcome Ebola. In contrast to the U.S, Nigeria knew it was possible that this virus traveled to their country, and that’s why health care workers received the essential training before the virus hit the country.

The nation’s largest health care workers’ union said Wednesday that 85 percent of surveyed nurses feel they are not prepared to deal with the deadly Ebola virus. These feelings of unsafety among heath workers can have consequences in the way health workers treat this fatal virus on infected people.

Based on these nurse’s responses, there is insufficient levels of preparation to handle Ebola. Some nurses said the training to deal with Ebola was limited to a 10-minute course in which they couldn’t ask questions. Other nurses said their training was from e-mails with links to the website of the CDC.

Nurses also said that hospitals don’t have the necessary equipment to ensure their safety. If we are not having the equipment needed for protection in hospitals, health workers will continue infecting.

So, what will happen? Health care workers will stop going to work because of the danger of working in a highly contagious environment in which they do not receive the essential training to deal with Ebola.

If health workers aren’t feeling safe with the equipment they are provided, Americans are not going to feel safe in hands of them and these health care workers would prefer to save themselves from being infected than from saving a life of an Ebola patient.

The CDC should be doing more to prepare doctors and hospitals. The number of biocontainment unit beds that we count on now is not sufficient enough to a worst-case scenario.

Although the CDC doesn’t want to create panic about this illness, they really need to develop better measures to protect and train health care workers; and even more when doctors and nurses in the U.S. are not used to treat Ebola. If a good training is not provided, Ebola could become an epidemic regardless of the skilled medical technologies that we have.

Ebola virus now threatens U.S.

By XUANCHEN FAN

Ebola virus disease (EVD) is transmitted to people from wild animals and spreads in the human population through human-to-human transmission. The first EVD outbreaks occurred in remote villages in Central Africa, near tropical rain forests. Currently, the virus is threatening the United Sates.

On Sept. 30, Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), announces the first diagnosed case of Ebola in the United States. Then government officially release the name of the first diagnosed: Thomas Eric Duncan. Unfortunately, Duncan died of Ebola in Dallas on Oct. 8.

Then, on Oct. 10, Nina Pham, a healthcare worker at Texas Presbyterian Hospital tested positive for Ebola. Another nurse, Amber Vinson, who treated Duncan became the third person diagnosed with the virus.

The government has done much to protect citizens from Ebola virus. Since Sept. 29, the U.S. military sent 4,000 troops to West African to establish treatment centers, which are called Expeditionary Medical Support Systems (EMSS).

At the same time, airports in New York, Newark, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Atlanta are examining certain international passengers for fever. The main target is West African visitors.

Lisa Monaco, assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, sent a brief announcement that “We are not facing just a health crisis –– We are facing a national security priority.”

As for President Obama, he has directly kept sending military to West Africa. The president is personally and actively demanding more troops to fight the disease.

The use of the military increases discontent among citizens.

“We make no apologies for being deliberate about the use of force, particularly when it engages the United States in conflicts in a region like the Middle East,” deputy national security advisor Ben Rhodes told CNN’s “The Situation Room” on Monday. “The American people want a president who is going to think hard before making those decisions who …. makes sure he is drawing from the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan.”

However, it is interesting that some merchants use the virus situation to sell Ebola productions. For instance, one merchant printed “Ebola” on a handbag and other accessories.

South Florida to become 51st state?

By MICHEL BERTRAN

City of South Miami officials have passed a resolution supporting the idea to split the state of Florida in half — drawing an east-west line near Orlando — making South Florida the 51st state of the United States.

On Oct. 7, the resolution was proposed by Vice Mayor Walter Harris at a city commission meeting and it passed with a 3-2 vote. The City of South Miami’s reasoning for this is because Tallahassee is not providing South Florida with with adequate representation of its concerns for sea-levels rising in the future.

South Florida has to deal with this environmental concern and Harris believes that nothing will get done in Tallahassee since it doesn’t really apply to them.

On SunSentinel.com he stated, “We have to be able to deal directly with this environmental concern and we can’t really get it done in Tallahassee,” Harris said. “I don’t care what people think — it’s not a matter of electing the right people.”

Mayor Philip Stoddard has actually been advocating for this for the past 15 years, but never went through with a resolution. Stoddard agreed with Harris’ statement.

“It’s very apparent that the attitude of the northern part of the state is that they would just love to saw the state in half and just let us float off into the Caribbean,” Stoddard said. “They’ve made that abundantly clear every possible opportunity and I would love to give them the opportunity to do that.”

In order for this to be approved, it would have to have an electorate approval from the entire state and a Congressional approval.

Twitter criticizes news covering two riots

By MEAGHAN McCLURE

The riots occurring in Ferguson, Mo., protesting the death of the unarmed, black teen Mike Brown, have been in the news media since early August. The ongoing social movement focuses on an issue mainly of race and civil rights.

Over the weekend, Pumpkinfest in Keene, N.H., sparked riots that stemmed from drunk college partiers.

After media coverage was released of the Keene riots, and because of some similarities between the two situations, people took to Twitter to criticize the media’s handling of both events.

Tweets such as, “The kids at #keenestate threw beer cans at cops and got arrested. Mike Brown threw his hands up and caught SIX shots” highlight the distaste for the inequality of both situations. Many of the Twitter users believe that Keene State’s riots were just as bad, but Ferguson attracted more negative media.

In an article from CNN, experts say that the two situations cannot be compared, because what happened in Keene was a riot and the events in Ferguson are part of an ongoing political movement.

The article does state, however, that Twitter was right in criticizing the media for racial discrepancies.

While Ferguson “riots” are aftermath of a unarmed teen killed by police, Keene was a riot of drunken students purely looking for a good time, which escalated into the riots. Despite the drastic differences in intentions of both situations, the media managed to use more loaded words and negative connotations when reporting on Ferguson than on Keene.

While participants in the Ferguson protests were labeled by news media as “thugs,” Keene rioters were only described as “rowdy.” Also, according to the media, Ferguson is made up of “animals destroying their community,” where Keene is just “mischief cause by booze filled revelers.”

These inconsistencies in news coverage of two similar, but drastically different, events are inexcusable. Because of the way these events are portrayed in the news, white behavior is normalized and made okay, while black behavior is condemned and allows for the prolonging of racism.

Even though Ferguson had significantly more important motives for riots, it was seen as violent and unacceptable in the media, while the events in Keene were excused as drunk kids trying to have a good time. The media’s coverage of issues like these perpetuate racism and the ongoing cycle, which is unacceptable in a society so heavily influenced by the media.

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.