What is the buzz about?

By DIYA VASUDEVAN

Buzzfeed, a name I am sure you have heard of before, is a name I see everyday. As a journalism student I have always aimed of writing in a way that is both entertaining and informative and I feel that Buzzfeed encompasses just that.

If you have not heard of Buzzfeed, it is essentially an American Internet news media company, created and founded by CEO and co-founder Jonah Perreti. Although Buzzfeed originally seems just entertainment oriented, at the root of it, it is an extremely multi-faceted Website where you can either take fun quizzes like ‘Which “Which ‘SNL’ Icon Are You?,” look up articles based entirely on cats “17 Extremely Helpful Cats” alongside articles about ISIS “U.S. Condemns ‘Despicable’ And ‘Cowardly’ ISIS Beheading Of Egyptian Christians In Libya.”

What makes Buzzfeed so buzz worthy is that it is one of a kind, audiences can interact with the website by clicking buttons like “OMG” or “LOL” depending on the article. In addition comments by viewers are taken seriously and Buzzfeed take the extra step to acknowledge the readers for noticing these errors.

Recently, Buzzfeed uploaded a video involving President Obama “Things Everybody Does But Doesn’t Talk About, Featuring President Obama.” Buzzfeed managed to not only provide an entertaining video featuring the most powerful man in America but editors also managed to inform the public about ObamaCare.

In an age where media are merging, so are the aims of articles. In today’s world, you do not need to choose between CNN and ENews. Buzzfeed is a one-stop shop to newsworthy stories whether its entertainment or serious news.  It is all about latest the buzz.

Journalism: Is it dying or evolving?

By TAYLOR BROTONS

Today, I had a rather depressing conversation with an older neighbor. She was asking all the typical questions most 20-something-year-olds get: How’s school? What are you studying? What do you want to do? The conversation was light until I answered a question with “I’m a journalism major.” I was met with a passive aggressive, “Well … isn’t that a dying field, sweetie? Anyone can be a journalist now.”

My heart sank a little and every fiber of my being wanted to rip out the flowerbed that judgmental woman was watering. I held my breath.

Social media, YouTube, Vine, Instagram, Facebook, Tumblr and other blogging sites are available to anyone who can afford the technology. While even I can admit that the prospect of iPhone-wielding teenagers becoming the majority of our news sources is fairly terrifying, the notion of journalism dying just because there are more means of “reporting” is, frankly, a cop out.

The way I see it is that journalism is not dying, but the playing field is getting increasingly larger and so is the number of players. The problem therein is competition. We need writers that can pull audiences away from what their sorority sister re-tweeted, what’s being shared on Facebook or re-posted on Instagram. I do believe that the challenge is not simply no one caring- its that everyone has media-induced attention deficit disorder.

The field of journalism is still alive and kicking-fighting actually. Fighting through the hoards of meaningless personality quizzes, “like if you agree” posts, and celebrity gossip to get to what is happening in the real world.

Ignorance about public records

By NADIA BACCHUS

This week, the topic of public records and the information people can gather by looking at these documents came up in not just one but two of my classes. By just logging in online, a person can find out if you own a house, if the house is paid off, what kind of car you have, your tag number, any criminal charges against you, whether you own a gun and much more.

The thought that so much of your personal information is available online for anyone to see can be a little daunting. I know I think it is, even though I know I have nothing to hide.

The uses of these tools for a journalist are invaluable to finding out basic background information before delving further into a story. Some people just fail to realize that this is all public information and become upset when certain information, such as a map of all the gun permits in their area, is published.

Despite the fact that it’s scary to think your information is open to anyone, I think the use of public records to gain more knowledge on a story is a great tool. It can lead to new information in a story that you wouldn’t be able to find otherwise and can give a great background toward any kind of story.

It’s your Internet, use it without limits

By NIGIA GREENE

The creation and development of the Internet has made many people’s lives so much easier. You can find literally anything that you are looking for, with the exception of some private documents held by the individuals or the government. Businesses, organizations and people alone use it for everything.

On Feb. 26, 2015, there will be a debate as to how fast the Internet can be for certain Web sites. It’s kind of like how a cellphone company promises you unlimited data but slows down after you have used a certain amount of LTE, or long term evolution. It basically determines the speed of how fast your phone processes information. Same goes for certain Web sites.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will meet to discuss whether the Internet will remain open, or net neutral, and continue to give all Web sites the same speed, or give the Internet providers the right to determine which Web sites are their priorities.

Some members of the FCC will be fighting for net neutrality, which is the open-ended Internet that we all now use and love. The others, including Tom Wheeler, chairman of the FCC, will be arguing for an Internet that is overseen by the government. He wants an Internet that prioritizes Web sites. In other words, Web sites that are used by a lot of people will get the higher speed while others will be slowed down or won’t be able to be used at all.

This change could cause havoc for people around the world. The Internet is not only for business but also for entertainment. Let’s hope for the best and keep the Internet in the hands of the people.

Today, anyone can write an article

By DIYA VASUDEVAN

I am a freshman who hopes to major in journalism one day and, even as I write this blog post, I am still learning, growing and improving. Writing is not just about putting words on paper, it is about using accurate sources and grammar and essentially being able to communicate a story in the best way possible.

In a world where online media are the No. 1 source for information, anyone can post an article and often times it is difficult to tell whether the information you are receiving is credible or not.

Oftentimes, when we see an interesting article posted on Facebook, we tend to click on it right away and, more often than not, these articles tend to either be advertisements or even mischievous viruses of some sort. Most of these articles contain incorrect information, wrong sources and are, at the core of it, poorly written pieces.

You can argue that media such as Google allow us to consume more information than ever before. However, if the information we consume is incorrect, how does it impact the way we view society?

Along with Photoshop with tools for editing, we cannot completely trust what we see. That is where the problem lies in journalism today. There are many news and information Web sites; therefore, there are numerous platforms for anyone to showcase what they have written. And anyone can create a new Web site, too, if that is the desired way to publish.

However, when does this start to devalue journalistic work? And in today’s world, what criteria can we use to decide what is and is not real journalism?

Can news keep pace with social media?

By LINDSAY THOMPSON

One of the great things about social media is that you can post something and instantly everyone whose interested can see it. It has created a window of opportunity for information to be spread far and spread quickly.

The way I first heard about the tragic shooting at Florida State University was not via CNN or ABC, but on social media. I always check my phone first thing in the morning, not turn on the news right when I wake up (and I’m sure I’m not the only one who does this), so social media sources were how I first heard about what happened.

People who were actually in the library when the shooting took place were sending out texts and tweets, and the news of the incident spread like wild fire across mediums like Facebook, Twitter and even Yik Yak.

There is no way that a journalist could have learned about the event and written an article faster than someone could have written a tweet.

Social media are changing how we get our information in this day and age. Of course, you can’t believe everything you read on the Internet, so social media don’t have as much credibility as an actual news source, but that doesn’t mean people aren’t still getting their information from people posting on the Web.

Social media are changing how reporters do their jobs. Everyone wants information sent directly to their phones right as it is happening. We want everything right now without having to wait.

Reputable news sources are beginning to take advantage of social media and it is shaping the future of journalism.

Technology and journalism — ‘BFFs’

By DOMENICA A. LEONE

There’s no doubt about it.

Over the past few years, journalism has changed and partly it has been because of its continuous effort to stay on track with its “BFF.”

Technology.

So let’s face it; we all have tried to be like somebody else in our lives so there’s nothing wrong or to be ashamed of. (You are forgiven Journalism!)

Essentially what journalism has attempted throughout the course of the years is to fit in into the current society’s needs and wants. Or at least try to juggle with them.

So in a world were we find ourselves continuously dissatisfied and looking for the next “big thing”; that which increases our efficiency and makes our life easier, you might ask yourself what could be journalism’s next card?

Well, believe it or not it might be wearable technology.

It might sound odd at first, be the thing is that wearable technology is here. And is here to stay.

Wearable technology goes beyond just smart watches; it could includes other smart jewelry, Google Glass, fitness trackers and beyond.

Therefore, with the increasing popularity these items are experiencing, journalists should start focusing their effort on how to best format content to all of these different types of technology.

Because, again, let’s face it as people start using this items and as long as the trend and interest keeps on, they will become an everyday staple.

Hence, wearable technology may open the door for new platforms and ways to deliver information, forcing reporters to adjust getting the most pertinent details of a story across in the quickest way possible. One thing is for sure though; it will push journalism even further into the world of “at a glance.”

“Backpacking” — not just for tourism

By DOMENICA A. LEONE

Journalism has entered a new era. With tight budgets and evolving technologies, adaptation has become a staple. (Adaptation towards the “minimalist” for the most part, though. Cutting on the middlemen, who represent “unnecessary” expenses when having technology handy that make things easy.)

As a result, efficiency and productivity has boosted within the industry. Tools for instant, global, visual communication have paralleled and managed to adjustment throughout this evolutionary process destined  for convenience.

Unintentionally, this has propelled a new form of journalism.

As mentioned before, the countless benefits of new technology continue to open up the door to better and improved tools for journalists and thus the industry.

Now we can all easily fit a video camera, laptop, editing software and hard drive into one backpack. And with this concept in mind people started to wonder … if you already got it all wouldn’t you be also able to do it all?

Here the birth of “Backpack Journalism”

The term expects for one to be an “all-inclusive journalist.” A multi-tasker. A complete combo.

It requires for the journalist to be a reporter, photographer and videographer, as well as an editor and producer of stories. It is a one-person team. This takes out the cost of having other members of a “crew” on site.

Some producers see the method as a key to unlocking new techniques of storytelling and certainly, for some instances, developing personalized or in-depth approaches to the occurrence of the event.

Agree or disagree one thing is certain.You’ll be traveling for many miles if you really want to “get the heart of the matter” of your story no?. And hey, wouldn’t this be an alternative form of tourism? Time to pack those bags!

The changing face of online news

By GABRIELLA SHOFER

With the transformation of news reporting to an online medium, traditional forms of breaking the news have been replaced by new, constantly updated platforms. The pervasiveness of these platforms is enhanced by their interactivity.

However, while in the past the online news environment was dominated by the same news corporations that controlled print news journalism, recently the online shift has enabled new forms of news websites to emerge.

One particular website that has infiltrated the online news arena and is fighting to claim its place in the list of reputable news sources is Buzzfeed. Originally, Buzzfeed’s main purpose was providing information that already existed on the Internet in an entertaining and engaging format. However, after establishing Buzzfeed News, the website has transitioned into breaking news in a similar manner to other online news sources.

Buzzfeed appeals to a younger audience through its informal format. The high use of images, videos and gifs presents human interest news stories in an compelling way. This is furthered by the ability for users to comment on the stories, often leading to incredibly high levels of shares for many news articles.

This highlights the main attribute that sets Buzzfeed apart from its competitors, the way that it capitalizes on the blurred boundary between print and online media that has been created by social media.

However, while this format has gained popularity with the younger generation, which consists of heavy social media users who favor interactive articles, the lack of a traditional news format can force readers to question the credibility of the news reported.

Jurnid: Self-marketing for journalists

By DOMENICA A. LEONE

All aspiring freelance journalist should acquaint himself or herself with this groundbreaking creation.

Jurnid; set to be “the next big thing,” is a platform aim to connect journalists with outlets in need of content creators.

Founded by Miami-based freelance media creative Andrew Quarrie, Jurnid works as a platform for students and professionals to showcase their talents and build an audience that is interested in publishing their content.

The site welcomes all journalists regardless of specialty and it’s free to sign up to be a contributor.

It serves multiple purposes. You might want to use it as a blogging platform or as a place to find worthwhile paying projects by connecting with business and branded newsrooms. Or it might also work the other way around.

People might take a glimpse at your posts and then ask for a helping hand. Even to the point that, you can establish a pay plan for your readers if they are finding it so interesting to whip through your writings.

Either of the ways the application has the added benefit of dealing with payments, that to be honest, they just don’t tend to come always on time on the real world. The service is designed to provide a low-cost way for either print or photo journalists to monetize their work.

And why should we students care? Not just for early exposure, but for the further ‘prep’ and training it has to offer. The site provides a mentoring community between journalists and professionals. This for providing feedback(mainly aimed at beginner and journalism students) as they publish their portfolios on the platform to help them thrive as self-managed entrepreneurs.

On an era were everything seems to be shifting towards the digital, you sure want to keep an eye on this. Word of advice.

Documentary, journalism share much

By XUANCHEN FAN

Basically, journalism and documentary film own many common characters. According to Wikipedia, journalism is gathering, processing, and dissemination of news and information related to the news to an audience. The function of journalism is similar to documentary film. Only difference is that the journalism is real-time reporting and the documentary film is a historical record.

Nowadays, many documentaries are finding news publishers to build the ideal platforms for their work. At the same time, schools of journalism increasingly offer courses related to multimedia production and film editing.

Journalists and filmmakers are increasingly using the same methods to tell stories. For instances, “A Short History of the High Rise” is a documentary film which tells ts istory in a reporter’s tone (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr9Y0C3pPxk).

One of the reasons that journalists began to tell stories in a different way is that images and videos contain a power to move and persuade audience to believe the fact. Conversely, the words and data are not convincing enough for the modern society.

People are able to see many news videos on CNN, New York Times or other news websites. Journalists are more and more adapt to use these technologies to tell a story.

Like Andrew DeVigal, the chair in Journalism Innovation and Civic Engagement at the University of Oregon, posted on Twitter “I came for the technology and stayed for the story.”

An interesting fact is that “storytelling” is the word of the day. Journalists and reporters are preferred to be named “storytellers” and “story-makers” rather than the original names “journalist” or “filmmaker.” No one wants to be maligned as a “content creator.”

Journalism and documentary films are gradually combined and build a clearer picture for their audience. As DeVigal posted on Twitter “Let’s move from ‘public service media’ to ‘public participation media.'”

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.

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.

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/

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.

Capturing the attention of the public

By GABRIELLA SHOFER

How often do you listen to the news while you’re in the car? Does the evening broadcast play in the background while you are eating dinner? Do you scroll through the news headlines on your mobile on the way to work without clicking through the full articles?

More and more, reading the news has become something that is done quickly and often when we are not fully engaged in what we are reading. This poses a threat to the news reporting industry as journalists are forgoing writing deeply researched stories in favor of those with catchy headlines in order to increase page views. This has also increased the pressure on journalists to write succinctly and convey the news in an efficient manner.

Gone are the days where reading the newspaper was a relaxed activity that was granted a specially carved out of period of time in the daily schedule. Now people are always multitasking and have the news on in the background.

Many news outlets have recognized the decrease in the attention spans of readers and have adopted video broadcasts to appeal to the more tech-savvy, younger audience. However, the use of these videos has an ulterior motive. With advertisers closely monitoring the time readers spend on webpages, watching videos captures the audience’s attention for longer than general articles and thus secures more advertising dollars for news websites.

This highlights the change in perspective of news conglomerates from providing news to gaining more advertising. In a sense, the public is losing in this instance as our attention is transformed into a commodity that these firms want to secure in order for them to draw in the maximum advertising dollars.

Another issue in response to the increased lack of attention of the public in reading long news articles is the emergence of newsgathering services such as The Skimm and The Daily Beast. These services provide a daily email newsletter that summarizes the top news stories for the day and can be personalized based on reader tastes and preferences. The Skimm founders noticed the lack of attention paid to the news media and summarized their reason for starting their daily summaries by stating:

“We soon realized three things: Reading the news is time consuming; Wanting to read the news is a hobby; lastly, not everyone has the time or interest.”

However, these services violate the principle of bias as their opinions about what is the most important news of the day imposes an implicit bias onto what news is fed to their readers. While these services ensure that people received their daily dose of news, people who rely on them are often led astray and can often miss crucial news items that might be highly relevant to them.

Ultimately, the way in which individuals absorb the news is based on personal preference. Whether one chooses to read the print newspapers, online websites or receive e-mail updates, it is important to remain aware of the potential biases that may be clouding the objectivity of many news outlets.

The weight of the Sunday paper

By GABRIELLA CANAL

It is no secret that print journalism is dying. It is no secret that the culture of our generation is the culprit. Our “click-frenzy” has appeased to our increasing and dire need for instant gratification. This same frenzy is the reason for my current frustration as an aspiring journalist: does it actually matter if I write five or 500 words anymore?

What happened to the weight of the Sunday newspaper? I am sure that, at one point, all of us have fallen victim to one of our parents’ grumbling “back in my day” speeches. However, the stories my dad has shared with me about what the newspaper used to be have stuck –looming over me with every passing year as a journalism student.

“Every time I pick up the newspaper, it’s thinner and thinner,” my dad always used to say.

Are we writing for the sake of content or instant views? There are so many advantages today to having instant news. There is no need to wait for the Sunday paper to know what problems face our communities and countries.

After all, it wouldn’t be news if it wasn’t instant and there is no crime in using the technology we have today to inform the public as quickly as possible. But in exchange for instant updates, I feel the American audience is losing the ability to really know about a subject because no one ever finishes reading – no one flips to page two or B1 anymore. I am guilty of this as well.

Today, our communication is enhanced in almost every way possible but what we lack is face-to-face communication. And this sort of communication is crucial in the industry itself.

Newspapers used to be powerhouse employers but now, as many put it, they are “dying out.” Core offices, where once ideas were pitched and gathered are now replaced by e-mails to the editor from home. The human factor is gone because of the ability to submit articles online. Does the industry face the extinction of the newsroom?

The overall theme of modernity presents these unforeseen challenges to the field of communications.

theSkimm: News in the 21st century

By EMILY JOSEPH

Have you heard of theSkimm? Are you a Skimmer? If not, get with the 21st century … if reading the news is not your thing.

A daily e-mail subscription started by two friends and former journalists, theSkimm brings the top stories of the day to you via email. But the news is “unique” per se because as their website says, theSkimm is a “filter.” It analyzes the top stories of the day and “breaks it down” in an easy to understand manner. They give pop culture comparisons, include sarcastic comments and write for their target audience: the 20-something woman.

I see the benefits and drawbacks of theSkimm. As a subscriber who wakes up to the e-mails first thing in the morning (you can pick what time of the day to receive emails), I really enjoy the service. But I’m also the type of person who reads/watches the news on my own time. Even after reading theSkimm in the morning I’ll turn on the Today Show or local news because that’s just something I like doing. I don’t rely on it as my only source of information, but more as additional support.

Screen Shot 2014-10-01 at 4.24.07 PM

An article from theSkimm on Wednesday, Oct. 1.

For those who don’t read or understand the news, especially international news, theSkimm can make you sound like a Harvard graduate instead of a high schooler. (Exaggeration, but you get the point).

Instead of raising your eyebrows in confusion when a colleague asks if you’ve heard about riots in Hong Kong, you would be able to respond. However, if you wanted to really contribute to that conversation and form a strong opinion, you should probably do further research and reading.

I can see how traditional news-followers and devoted newspaper subscribers would have a fit over theSkimm, but I think it’s really a great service for modern young adults. Particularly college students who are just transitioning out of the “all-about-me-world” to the “real world.” It’s a good stepping stone from relying on just Twitter for the news.

Who knows what the future holds for theSkimm, or print journalism for that matter. But as of right now, it looks like both are here to stay.

Using social media as news sources

By GABRIELLA SHOFER

The escalation of news reporting is heightened through the use of social media, which increases the involvement of the public in leading news issues. This week, the world watched as Hollywood actress Emma Watson spoke at the United Nations about feminism.

While the brave act taken by this actress was covered in news media, this positive coverage was overshadowed by the ensuing public reaction, which involved threats against her safety and privacy.

Multiple news outlets reported on Watson’s moving speech, which addressed the issue of gender equality, and her bravery was highly praised. However, the fast moving pace of the Internet enabled the public to share their own opinion and quickly created negative trending Twitter hashtags.

She was publicly targeted by hackers who threatened to expose nude photographs of her. While social media can be used positively to increase awareness and action for social causes, in this instance, people who disagreed with her views abused the mask of anonymity provided by social media to comment in a vicious manner.

As more and more individuals look to social media as a source of news, it begs the question of how trusting we can be of the information it presents, as it is often heavily clouded by personal biases.

EmmaWatsondeathhoaxBut what is more shocking is the way that this was reported in the media and the number of inaccuracies that were released about the situation.

One of the most disturbing aspects for me was the fact that USA Today, a newspaper Web site that I frequently visit, reported on the death of the actress, which was a hoax.

This exposes the pervasiveness of the issue of fact checking for news reporters.

When a source assumed to be extremely reputable reports on issues like this, it brings into question the credibility of the whole reporting entity and can change the perspective of readers in their trust of the source. This further highlights the increased influence that social media is having on news reporting.

Not only are reporters writing about what is occurring on social media, the reporters are beginning to trust social media as fact. This idea is frightening for the news reporting industry and society at large due to the fact that social media is heavily clouded by personal bias.