The Golden Rule for TV news

By KERRIE HECKEL

Recently I watched a newscast where there was an abrupt shift between a package covering different theories on what happened on flight 370 to another announcing that Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher were expecting twins.

I was a bit taken aback that the station had scheduled a story on a tragic event to precede such a perky report on celebrities. To me, it felt that by grouping the two so closely together Flight 370 had been belittled.

It was as though the disappearances and possible deaths of these people was just another human-interest story.

My viewing experience got me wondering how I would feel if a friend or family member of mine had been on that flight and how I would feel if I was watching that station. Surely the event would be devastating to me and to see it taken so lightly by others would be sickening.

So why then did the news station set their schedule up in this way?

The story itself was reported professionally. I don’t think the news station meant to be malicious.

What happened was a crime of carelessness.

In the news station’s defense, Flight 370 has been in the news for quit some time now and it is natural to be slightly desensitized after hearing about an event over and over, and for journalists, who hear and report about tragedies on a daily basis viewing tragedy from an unemotional place is all the more natural.

Still it is important for journalists to remember their audiences do not share that same nonchalant attitude toward death. Especially if their audience could include family members of those involved.

In the case I address now, Flight 370 could have been reported much more tastefully had the scheduling been amended. Yet journalists could avoid issues like this one all together by adopting the golden rule and report as they would like to be reported to.

Venezuela needs the news media

By SOFIA ORTEGA

It has been more than one month since the protests in Venezuela began. The death toll has risen to 31, more than 461 people have been injured, and thousands are being detained.

The news media has been covering this story and even people from other countries have taken over social media to be the voice of Venezuela.

However, as protests continue, media coverage has declined.

Taking in consideration that in Venezuela the government controls the media, news stations around the world should keep covering the story.

Many Venezuelans have migrated to other countries due to their country’s situation, but most of them still wish to go back. For this reason, media around the world that believes in freedom of speech and in democracy should be the voice of Venezuela.

 

Separating fact, fiction of Flight 370

By JOHN RIOUX

Nearly two weeks ago, Malaysian Airlines flight 370 disappeared with 239 passengers on board.

Information regarding the flights whereabouts has become some of the most sought after daily news. Many different theories and conspiracies have been brought to the public’s eye through various methods of news.

Networks such as CNN have been dedicating hours upon hours to this single issue, endlessly talking about a discussion that has no concrete answer.

It is important that the media focuses their theories based on certainties that have been given rather than headlines that will receive views.

The fact that there is no definitive answer yet on where the plane is located gives journalists the opportunity to write stories they know will garner attention. Rather than pushing their readers to known truths, many are spreading conspiracies that often times have no basis.

While I understand those in the media are under heavy pressure to entice readers to their page, spreading fictional work is not the way to go about it.

People are drawn to abnormal headlines as they want to be apart of something that has never happened before. There are many people who are hoping the disappearance of the plane is a conspiracy, as numerous stories would come from it.

While nobody truly knows where this flight is, I hope news networks and journalists alike stop pushing their own personal agendas. It is tedious to watch analysts argue about something they know very little accurate information about.

The obsession with Flight 370

By JENNA JOHNSON

After Malaysia Air flight 370 went missing on March 8, the news media have been obsessed with finding it. Every TV station, network, and website offers viewers new developments, clues, and even theories at any opportunity.

The story even has celebrities captivated — Courtney Love chimed in tweeting a picture of the ocean with what appears to be oil on the surface that she thought might indicate where the plane landed. (Her theory was later rejected by crowdsourcing site, Tomnod.com).

Screen Shot 2014-03-18 at 4.57.17 PMAirline issues are often in the news, from excessive airport delays to mechanical difficulties and, unfortunately, sometimes a plane crashes. However, none of these stories make the top story of news websites for 11 consecutive days.

What makes this story so interesting is the mystery of it all. Audience attention has raised many questions: Why did the plane veer off course? Who was responsible? Was it an act of terrorism or simply a freak accident? And more importantly, why is this plane so hard to find it?

So far, many of these questions have been unanswered. The flight appeared to be on the correct course from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing until all contact was lost at 1:22 a.m. The Royal Thai Air Force radar and the Malaysian military radar were able to track the plane turning west over the Indian Ocean toward the Strait of Malacca.

Investigators theorize that the plane was intentionally steered off-course, but still have no working knowledge of the plane’s final fate.

I think it is rare and particularly interesting that a story is picked up while it has more questions than answers. It doesn’t even lend itself to news coverage well, as there is no footage of the actual plane. Newscasters can only offer the new developments and interview aviation experts, occasionally throwing in some b-roll of the Indian Ocean or the aircraft tracking system. The story has become slightly more conducive to television with the background checks on the pilots and interviews of family members. In this particular case, the lack of answers is actually what causes the story to not to be newsworthy, but to stay newsworthy for so long.

However, though Flight 370 still remains a mystery, what is not a mystery is how much the families of the missing must be suffering. The story is both a mystery and a tragedy, and as the story develops, I truly hope that the media gives due respect to those who are personally affected by it. At times it is easy to become enveloped in the conspiracy and suspense, but the media must also remember that the 227 passengers lost is more than just a number.

Syrian war turns three — and worsens

By PHOEBE FITZ

The crisis in Syrian, now approaching its third anniversary, is not getting any better, as a village in the central Homs Province was seized by government forces on Saturday.

The village, Zara, is located near the Lebanese border and was previously held by the rebels. After weeks of gruesome fighting, the government has finally gained control.

Control of Zara is important to the Syrian government for the town’s large Sunni Muslim population-as the majority of Sunnis have supported the revolution-and because the town is another gain for the government’s quest to secure the Syria-Lebanon border.

This border is practically nonexistent, however, as Lebanon continues to be pulled into Syria’s war. Lebanese Sunnis and Shiites alike continue to pour into Syria- each fighting for different sides.

The civil war has taken more than 140,000 lives and more continue to be taken every day in battles themselves as well as other terrorist attacks. 2.5 million Syrians have already fled the country.

About 60 miles south of Zara, a town called Yabroud is now being targeted by the government forces. Another town on the edge of the Lebanese border, Yabroud is rebel held and has reported heavy aerial attacks.

Not all riots are merciless

By NICOLE LOPEZ-ALVAR

Members of Pussy Riot, the Russian feminist art collective based in Moscow, were attacked this week while eating at a McDonald’s in Russia.

Six men wearing political paraphernalia came after two of the group’s primary members, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Maria Alyokhina, with paint from syringes and threw garbage at them as they were eating breakfast.

This is neither the first nor the last time the dissident members of Pussy Riot will be in the headlines for being targeted by government officials and radicals.

However, with the power of social media and video documentation, Pussy Riot has been able to make a positive, yet controversial, mark in Russia and across the Western hemisphere. It has done so by promoting an equal rights agenda through provocative musical performances.

These performances and “riots” are videotaped and spread around the Internet until government officials demand for them to stop. Only issue is, they never stop.

After this week’s attack, the women took to YouTube immediately to affirm the obscene behavior they had unfortunately encountered from sexist and prejudiced individuals. Even in 2014, the art collective continues to strike a nerve in Russia.

“It hurts! Why are you doing this?” Tolokonnikova said in the video, with green stains on her face and hands. “You don’t have the right to hurt me. Please don’t do that to anyone anymore.”

After the band members posted the video of the attack online, the global response was proliferating — and in retrospect, all publicity is good publicity for such activists. This assault is another example of the corrupt mentality plaguing Russia.

Pussy Riot is distinguished in the West as a group of courageous activists who continue to fight for the most basic human right — the freedom of speech. However, as illustrated in this post, the group’s provocative and, at times, disruptive approaches to art activism are still unappealing to the ultra conservative, “Putinistic,” eye.

The Blade Runner’s fall from grace

By RYAN HENSELER

In the 2012 London Olympics, one man touched the hearts and inspired the minds of millions around the globe, no matter the country.

That man was Oscar Pistorius of South Africa. The Blade Runner. He was the man who became an Olympic athlete despite losing both of his legs and was able to run with the help of prosthetics. His story seemed too perfect even for Hollywood, but one night last summer, everything came crashing down.

Today, Pistorius sits in a South African court, on trial for the cold-blooded murder of his girlfriend. Although he pleaded not guilty, the evidence seems to be piling up for  conviction.

Pistorius has admitted to shooting his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, but he claims that he thought that she was an intruder. Personally, that seems like a thin excuse, at best, and a ridiculous one at worst.

Seriously, how do you not recognize your own girlfriend? Why would you blindly shoot at someone without clarifying who it is? If his story were true, all that Reeva would have had to do to prevent tragedy is say, “Hey Oscar, it’s me.” Hopefully, the judge will use reason to lock Pistorius up and throw away the proverbial key.

It’s sad to see that a man that people all over the world once respected and admired is actually a monster. This situation reminds me of once-beloved Lance Armstrong’s fall from grace, except that Armstrong never killed anyone.

It is also disappointing in many ways that because of Pistorius’ celebrity, all of the media coverage surrounding this trial is focused on him, rather than Steenkamp. While it is because of who Pistorius is that this trial is such big international news, the memory of his victim should certainly not be forgotten.

Websites push us to ‘pay attention’

By NICOLE HOOD

With the Olympic Games, world news has attracted a new sort of spotlight. Controversy over South Africa’s gold medal winner Oscar Pistorius’ murder trial has brought  Africa’s trial system into this spotlight and, subsequently, post-apartheid matters and conflict.

This is, by far, minor news compared to stories of dangerous protests and political meltdowns in Venezuela, Ukraine, Syria and Thailand. World news websites explicitly display videos and pictures of beaten protestors and tortured prisoners in an attempt to show, rather than tell, the horrors that are happening in parts of the world most people don’t ever really think about.

This takeover of news websites by world news gives me hope that the world today — all the people, consumed by day-to-day problems like bad drivers, test grades, piles of paperwork or long lines — will, in the midst of all the current international chaos, take a step back and at least acknowledge what is happening around the world.

Living in the United States, we have advantages that other countries don’t have: geographically, most countries have to cross the sea to get to us militarily; and the U.S. holds more than half of the entire world’s military power, keeping us safe and comfortable. Because of our strength and location, most of the younger generation in the United States do not even glance at the conflicts in European, Middle Eastern and Asian countries. The generation of our parents had to face the Cold War, but, as their children, we have not faced the immediate danger of an impending war and have no idea what the terrors of war could be like.

All of the sudden, though, front pages preview all kinds of internationally based stories: death, violence, and dangerous government reform protests in Ukraine, Venezuela, and Syria, Russia’s ‘declaration of war’ on Ukraine, North Korea’s missile launches, terrorist attacks in China, and radical groups dropping bombs in Nigeria. While not all of these attract the same amount of attention, the complete political meltdowns in Ukraine, Venezuela and Syria have attracted the gaze of those distracted American eyes.

Now, several writers on the Internet are calling on us to pay attention and help, saying that now there are so many conflicts that we cannot ignore them — saying that we have to take a stance on what’s happening. I believe that this is a growing trend and it has incredible potential. The younger generation is picking up on these articles and posting them on Facebook for their friends to notice. These articles call for my generation not only to take a stance but also to be passionate about it — to be passionate about it enough to at least educate others about the problem.

One article mentioned how my generation likes to liken itself to the generation of the 1960s, of Woodstock, peace and “flower power.” While we have our own form of Woodstock, while we carry the same “one love” attitude to these festivals, we are not them by any means. ‘They protested the Vietnam war, led a sexual revolution, fought for women’s rights and civil rights and changed the landscape of America for good.

We watch Netflix a lot and claim to be hipsters, but are okay with our alternative culture to be entirely superficial, free of substance or meaning. But we could be true hipsters, if we tried. There’s a lot that should be upsetting enough for us to integrate actual ideals and principles to our way of life beyond wearing boots in 80-degree weather and listening to music that sounds nothing like music.

I have one thing to say to these writers: preach on. Good luck, because in the midst of chaos, someone should be preaching about the problems that the world is facing. Maybe these articles on the Internet have more power than the writers think they do because they push for peaceful action, for standing up for what we say we do and for, at least, knowledge.

For more information, go to:

http://www.adolescentpress.com/2/post/2014/02/5-things-that-should-piss-every-teenager-off.html

Press freedom tested in Hong Kong

By KERRIE HECKEL

Hong Kong is experiencing what CNN calls its all-time low in press freedom.

Historically, Hong Kong has served as the “window into China,” reporting stories about government criticism that mainland reporters could not or would not report.

However, Hong Kong is experiencing serious decline in their press freedom as journalists fall victim to being bullied out of reporting.

Protest organizer and veteran reporter Shirley Yam says headlines and complete pages have been removed from newspapers, columnists have been sacked, and interviews have been bought.

“We get calls from senior government officials, we get calls from tycoons, saying ‘we don’t want to see this in your paper,'” Yam said.

A prime example of oppression of the press in recent days is Kevin Lao.

Lao was editor for Ming Pao, a daily newspaper known for its coverage of human rights, before a Malaysian editor replaced him.

To add insult to injury, Lao was hospitalized Wednesday after being attacked with a meat cleaver. The source of Lao’s attack is unknown, however, many fear that if incidents like Lao’s aren’t addressed seriously and stopped, public fear will grow and Hong Kong’s press will be further prevented from running stories dealing with government and big business.

The issue in Hong Kong highlights the relationship between the press and its government. It seems there is a conundrum with the fact that journalists are supposed to serve the watchdog function over the same government that they depend on to give them the rights and safety to do so.

In the United States, we experience the luxury of a constitution that explicitly tells us there is freedom of press within the First Amendment. Checks and balances within the government makes sure this right is protected.

However, in places where the press is not so fortunate, being watchdog to the government can be dangerous, especially if the government doesn’t want to be monitored. This is the heart of the issue in Hong Kong.

Hong Kong legislative council member Cyd Yo told CNN, “Beijing is a control freak. It cannot bear any opposition.”

It seems to me that journalists and the public alike are on a long road for change in the special administrative region of China. While many are protesting now, what China needs is a fundamental change in how its government relates with the press and a change like this will need both time and passionate supporters.

Media versus Venezuela

The recent anti-government protests in Caracas, Venezuela, in direct protest of President Nicolas Maduro, have not only taken the country by storm, but social media as well.

Social media is uncovering the truths and lies behind what Venezuelans, and Americans, hear and see through mainstream broadcast news. Recently, former president Hugo Chavez forced a slant in media coverage, making Venezuelan broadcasters report biased and political propaganda-driven news.

This has caused the new generation of Venezuelans to take action—this time, not in a physical manner.

“I don’t trust our television and radio stations at all,” said Adriana Sanchez in a brief interview with USA Today in Caracas. “The government stations just run propaganda, while the few privately owned stations are afraid to broadcast the truth. What other options do we have?”

Many Venezuelans have resorted to Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to stay informed and to understand the discrepancy between what they see on their television screens and what they read online. While both the government and the opposition are using social media to promote their own agendas, the truth is more readily available to citizens who need it most—including journalists.

According to the Venezuelan news website, panorama.com.ve, media outlets have been victimized by protesters and police harassing journalists on the streets.

CNN reported this week that its news crew had its cameras and transmission taken away at gunpoint.

This suppressive nature of news journalism has had a tremendous impact on what major news corporations and publications from around the world are reporting. While the chaos continues to unravel in Venezuela, news outlets such as CNN, The New York Times, BBC, and Al Jazeera English, have all had minimal coverage of Venezuela due to this lack of information.

Therefore, it has been up to Venezuelans to make a stand for their rights and their country without fighting fire with fire. From the Venezuelan-Americans of Miami to the new generation of Venezuelan descendants around the world, social media has provided more ways to uncover the truth than ever before.

Venezuela: No voice, no democracy

By SOFIA ORTEGA

Students have been out on the streets of every major city in Venezuela since Feb. 12, leaving until today six deaths, many injured, and hundreds arrested.

Leopoldo López, one of the opposition leaders from the political party “Volundad Popular,” urged all citizens to march peacefully against the regime of President Nicolás Maduro to put an end to the economic and social crisis of the country.

Maduro also summoned his followers to a manifest for “peace” in which he claimed indirectly to López, “Coward, fascist, surrender yourself that we are looking for you.”

The government issued a captive order to López for the incidents that happened at the march on Feb. 12. He was charged with conspiracy, arson, homicide and terrorism.

López turned himself to the authorities in front of tens of thousands protesters.

“If my imprisonment serves to awaken this town, so be it,” López said shortly before turning himself. “I have nothing to fear. I will always give the face.”

Even though the most serious charges (murder and terrorism) were dropped; if López is convicted he could face up to 10 years of jail.

But who is it really to blame?

According to the constitution, Venezuelans have the right to protest peacefully.

President Maduro blames it on activist Leopoldo López for calling the opposition to protest.

However, images and videos not shown by the media in Venezuela are proof that the National Guard is using arms against civilians and that they are the authors of the crimes that occurred.

Yes, military. The ones who promise the country to look for its citizens are shooting, torturing and beating students.

The protests are not only being held in Venezuela, but all around the world.

Today, it is not anymore a problem of different political ideologies, but about the safety and the millions of innocent people that die every day in Venezuela.

Students in Venezuela are risking their lives at the protests to because they want democracy, freedom of speech, safety.

As well, students living outside of Venezuela have become the voice of the country. They are effectively using social media to expand the truth and welcome people to join their struggle.

It is uncertain what the future holds for Venezuela, but protests are growing stronger and leave no signal of ending soon.

Sochi problems continue to get attention

By TAYLOR HOFF

Controversy is arising over the conditions at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi. After seven years of preparing the city for the Olympics- seven years filled with corruption, debt, worker-rights controversy, etc.- is it fair that the misfortunes in Sochi are becoming a punch line?

“#SochiProblems” is a newly consuming hash tag on social media. It’s mainly pursued by journalist’s living in hotels with unfinished lobbies, toxic water, shortages of pillows and sheets, and other less than positive conditions of the hotels in Sochi.

The tweets and articles written by journalists living under these circumstances have catapulted to full on media frenzy. Crazy pictures and witty tweets have led the unpreparedness of Sochi to become the punch line of the Games.

However, this humorous and overwhelming new trend may be harming legitimate news coverage. The twitter handle “Sochi Problems” currently as more than 100,000 more followers than that of the official twitter of the Olympics.

Controversy has arisen due to complaints that this seems more like making fun of a poor classmate, than genuine, necessary reporting. After Russia took seven years to prepare for these games and sacrificed so much, is it fair to poke fun at their shortcomings?

The other side expresses their belief that Russia did in fact take seven years to prepare. Is it uncalled to poke fun after seven years of preparations, and hotel lobbies are still missing?

Either way, the main problem lays in the media attention. It is not right that the poor conditions in which the journalists are living are taking precedent in the news over actual newsworthy stories about the Games. The journalists’ need to refocus- they didn’t go to Sochi for a five star vacation, but to keep the world informed on the Games.

Ugandan president signs anti-gay bill

By JENNA JOHNSON

Last week was full of proud declarations of homosexuality from prominent names and an overall positive reception from the media and society.

Early in the week, University of Missouri football lineman and potential top draft for the NFL, Michael Sam, established himself as the first openly gay player to be drafted into the NFL.

Citing Michael Sam as a “hero,” Actress Ellen Page came out as a lesbian on Valentine’s Day during a speech she gave in Las Vegas.

Both celebrities have received much support from fans and LGBT organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign. Social media exploded with congratulations and encouragement.

Screen Shot 2014-02-18 at 11.31.36 AM

Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni signed a bill prohibiting homosexuality.

Homosexuality is already illegal in 78 countries around the world, including much of Africa and the Middle East. Seven of these countries punish homosexuality by the death penalty. In Uganda, homosexual acts are punishable by 14 years in prison. Even organizations or individuals who reach out to counsel homosexual persons can face imprisonment.

President Museveni said he was persuaded to sign the bill, not out of political, but scientific, motivations. He claimed legalizing homosexuality poses “serious public health consequences” according to his scientific advisers.

Musevini’s advisers also assert that homosexuality is an “abnormal behavior” and not something a person is born with.

In the United States, the controversy of gay marriage legalization is always in the news media. It seems to be the “will-they, won’t they” issue of the century.

Whether or not same-sex marriage is legalized in our country, maybe it’s time to pause and enjoy the freedom of expression guaranteed to us by the Constitution.

Despite overwhelming support from the LGBT community, both Page and Sam undoubtedly received a backlash from certain anti-gay groups. Unfortunate though this is, at least they never have to face imprisonment, violence, or unemployment that the few openly gay Africans struggle against.

In my opinion, how a country reacts to the homosexual community demonstrates its degree of progressiveness. The support for LGBT causes is increasing in the United States today, especially with the younger generations. Although the gay marriage controversy remains murky, almost any American would at the very least agree with a person’s individual right to be gay.

Personal opinions aside, from a legal standpoint, Americans uphold all anti-discrimination rights. The matter of whether homosexuality is a choice does not even apply, because everyone is guaranteed the right to express him or herself.

President Obama said that if Uganda’s president passes the anti-gay bill, it will complicate relations with the east African nation. President Museveni decided to push through with the law, opting to uphold the country’s “morals” despite losing international allies.

How “moral” is it to alienate, penalize,and even torture a citizen for how he/she chooses to express love?

Uganda’s government’s behavior demonstrates unacceptable treatment of not just to the gay community, but any group. When this kind of expression is severely punished, it becomes an issue of human rights and dignity.

It’s too soon to tell how relations with Kenya will pan out after the bill passes. However, it seems from the outcry of international responses that most of the world is ready to defend the homosexual community and freedom of expression.

Olympics: World news or gossip?

By NICOLE HOOD

The Olympics are at the forefront of today’s world news. However, there are moments when I question the priority of news reporters.

The other day, I went on CNN and the first thing I saw was U.S. ice skater Ashley Wagner’s face of disappointment at her score.

There are many things about the Olympics to report on that hold a lot of significance — the condition of Sochi as a city to host such a big event, human rights problems in Russia, countries’ relative numbers of medals — but, in my view, an athlete’s lack of composition in such an intense moment is not worthy of the front page of such a major world news website.

In my opinion, to place a picture of the face of disappointment as one of the ‘five favorite moments from the first weekend of the Olympics’ is a cruel joke. The article drew just as much attention to a few seconds of infuriated disappointment as it did to Russia winning its first gold medal in the games and total medals won after the first weekend.

To be fair, the article featured Jamie Anderson’s (American gold medalist) tweet about her gratitude to friends and family after her great performance. Although this is another example of social media appearing in the world news, at least it’s fitting under the category of “favorite moments.” Amy Wagner’s face was not on this list because it was endearing, it was because it was scandalous.

Do we really find scandals so important that they should be put in newspapers? Are we looking for ways to interest the public in the 2014 Olympics? Are we just fixated on having a list of five that the reporters felt inclined to place this example in with the rest?

The second question can be answered with a simple “no,” as the first sub-headline of the report, the first example, was “That face.” This was the first topic presented to the audience.

I urge reporters to at least think about the first two questions before they choose topics. When presented side-by-side, news transfer a sense of importance. An important event may elevate another’s importance, even if the latter doesn’t attract that much on its own. On the other hand, something like gossip in world news could end up downplaying an event that makes a difference.

Sports equality: Gay athletes in sports

By KELLY BRODY

It seems as though we are living in the “Age of Equality.” Gay marriage is being passed in many new states and countries, and more and more celebrities are embracing a “don’t hide who you truly are” attitude.

It’s cool now to be out of the closet and most of the world, in this progressive Age of Equality, is accepting of those who choose to announce to the world their sexual orientation.Yet while Hollywood has embraced ‘coming out,’ one sector of pop culture seems to be still hidden deep in the closet and less accepting of gays — the world of sports.

Seen as a testament to one’s manhood that dates back to the testosterone-heavy first-ever Olympic Games, sports are often a sign of heterosexuality. It’s a common misunderstanding that a boy involved in sports can’t be gay, which is why many parents suspecting of the sexual orientation of their sons feel that the “cure” is sports like football.

With the recent announcement of Micheal Sam, a young NFL prospect hailing from the University of Missouri who came out as gay, the sporting world has been in shock. Not often does a football player shed his macho image and come forward about his sexual orientation. He stated, “I am an openly proud gay man,” in a New York Times piece, but his teammates have known since August. If Sam is drafted and earns a spot on a team roster, he will be the first openly gay player in the NFL.

Still, eight NFL staff and coaches that were polled by Sports Illustrated believe that Sam will drop in the draft due to his announcement. Backlash isn’t uncommon for gay athletes. Tweets often contained strong language. Two examples: “So, message to Michael Sam and those like him: Nobody wants to hear about a man who likes to suck cock. Get back in the fucking closet” (@icanhasbailout) and “Michael Sam first openly gay athlete in the NFL??? that’s freaking disgusting!!!!!! should be kicked out if the NFL and the USA” (greyclark24).

Sam’s announcement is coming off the heels of British diver Tom Daley’s coming out, which he did via a YouTube video a few months ago. The Olympian was shown massive support, which could be due to the fact that diving is seen as a “gay” sport versus the masculinity of football. Another sport that is often labelled as “gay” is men’s figure skating. Still, American men’s figure skaters are encouraged to not announce their sexual orientation for the purpose of appealing to the American public and judges.

This fear of being gay in sports is something that should not exist in the coming years. Sexual orientation does not change the athleticism of great athletes, nor does it diminish their accomplishments. For this year’s Olympics in Sochi, where being a gay athlete is abhorred, the world’s athletes responded with the utmost support for LGBTQ rights. Germany walked in the opening ceremony wearing rainbow snowsuits, Greece’s athletes had rainbow fingertips on their gloves, and Blake Skejellerup, an openly gay New Zealand speed skater, wore a rainbow pin.

With the bravery of both Michael Sam and Tom Daley, hopefully more athletes will feel safe coming out of the closet and the Sochi Olympics will open the eyes of the world, especially Russia, that discrimination of gay athletes is not something to be tolerated in our ever evolving world.

Sochi not ready, but games begin

By NICK CARRA

The opening ceremonies for the Winter Olympic Games began at 11 a.m last Friday and reports from journalists about the conditions of the host city Sochi, Russia, are are not looking good.

Hotels are in shambles. Reporters and athletes live in rooms that would disgust me with their colorless, broken-down walls and filthy bathrooms.  The locks on doors do not work, plumbing is not fully functional, water looks like warm beer and curtains and walls are torn apart.

A reporter tweeted a picture of two glasses of water from Sochi, Russia.  Hotels advised residents to avoid the water because it was "dangerous."

A reporter tweeted a picture of two glasses of water from Sochi, Russia.  Hotels advised residents to avoid the water because it was “dangerous.”

From what it looks like, Sochi isn’t ready to host the Winter Olympic Games. Do an image search for “Sochi Olympic hotel conditions.” Inside you will find pictures of toilets placed feet away from each other without privacy, blank walls and malfunctioning electricity.

Even the slope-style snowboarding course was inadequate.

Employees were seen hours before Friday’s events working on the slope-style course, athletes say the snow conditions aren’t good and some have even been injured during the practice runs.

Marika Enne of Finland was carried off in a stretcher, after hitting her head during the slope-style practice run.  U.S athlete Shaun White jammed his wrist during the practice as well.

White withdrew from the event, although his main focus is to win the half-pipe, he would also like to avoid injury.

“With the practice runs I have taken, even after course modifications and watching fellow athletes get hurt, the potential risk of injury is a bit too much for me to gamble my other Olympics goals on,” White said regarding his withdrawal.

During the opening ceremony, the fifth ring in the Olympic symbol failed to illuminate, which furthers the thought that Sochi just may have too much on their hands to handle the Olympic games.  From what it looks like, those in Russia failed to prepare the city of Sochi for the 2014 Winter Olympics.

Writing with a national perspective

By NICOLE HOOD

I recently read a CNN article on the preliminary session of the Syrian peace talks, in which a peculiar event took place — Iran was invited to the conference and then dis-invited by UN chief Ban Ki-moon.

The reporters went on to say that ‘Western leaders believe Iran has provided military and intelligence support to Syrian government forces,’ and that fighters from Iran-backed militia have fought on the side of the Syrian government. When I first read this, who actually dis-invited Iran was unclear to me, as was the reason that the event occurred. The succession of the reporters’ choices implies that the reason Iran did not attend/was dis-invited was for military reasons.

The reality of the situation was that the UN gave Iran an ultimatum: that Iran could attend the peace conferences on the side of the UN (against the Syrian government) or they could not attend. Iran chose not to stand against Syria, and did not attend. This was information available to my International Studies teacher but not to the reporters at the time, and they used Western leaders’ opinions as their next step in explaining the information.

Does this represent a nationalistic explanation of international events?

I think so. This nationalism, I believe, comes out naturally and is almost inescapable. The only way one could report this in an absolutely unbiased way would be to provide the audience with a transcript of the talks and let them come to their own conclusions. People generally want a summary — and all summaries are written from the view of the reporter. Most people with an interest in world news still do not want an intensive reading representing a complex and dizzying array of international relations.

That being said, the fact that our tendency towards nationalism is expressed with militaristic assumptions can be dangerous in the world of reporting—and in our own lives. To assume militaristic reasons behind anything because of a lack of information might be rationally considering all possibilities—or it might be demonization of other countries or other parts of the world that we don’t understand.

I believe that the fault lies not particularly in presenting this one personal conclusion (of many possible conclusions) but in leaving out that they could not find a definite reason to present to the audience or that it was only one conclusion of many. Had the reporters mentioned the lack of information, I (and other readers) would be less inclined to confidently believe that militaristic support was the key to figuring out what was happening.

After reading the article, that piece of information stood out most to me — and then, the next day I learned what I confidently took away from the article was wrong. Iran was not particularly hiding something military and that was not why they were dis-invited. The slightest difference in presentation of information makes a big difference.

For more information about this, go to:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/22/world/europe/syria-geneva-talks/index.html?hpt=wo_c1

Media focus on Russia’s anti-gay laws

By NICOLE LOPEZ-ALVAR

Friday is the official start of the 2014 Winter Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia; however, the biggest story coming out of Sochi has little to pertain to the games at all.

From the homepage of Google to the breaking headline of any online news source, there is no doubt that the media is fighting back against Russia’s anti-gay policies being enforced as the Winter Games ensue.

The law, which criminalizes any discussion of gay rights in the presence of minors, is an example of the unfortunate reality we live in — discrimination continues to persist in many parts of the world. According to the Associated Press, gay activists have been penalized across Russia ever since the law was implemented in 2013. Such a law only fuels hatred and justifies violence.

Yet, there is one global medium that has sided with civil rights — that is, the news media.

Google’s “Doodle” on its search homepage, which debuted on Thursday night, is its logo with an illustration incorporating the colors of the rainbow. It has been seen around the world, even Russia, and has sparked both cheer and outrage. Below the logo was a subtle, yet powerful, message in clear support of equality for all.

Google, a worldwide corporation, has taken a stand to publicly show support for LGBT people who are struggling for equality around the world.  According to Google’s website, “every day Google answers more than one billion questions from people around the globe in 181 countries and 146 languages.”

That is, roughly one billion people a day, whether aware so or not, will glance at that logo and be aesthetically drawn to the colors of the rainbow — the official colors of the pride flag. It is in these subtle ways that the media and many major corporations have brilliantly managed to maintain the principles in which they stand for — delivering to all the people.

Google is not alone. Three official sponsors of the U.S. Olympic Committee, Chobani, AT&T, and DeVry University, have taken public stands against the anti-gay law in Russia as well.

These positive actions have outshined the media’s coverage of the anti-gay law itself. Their public defense of the LGBT community during one of the world’s most televised events, the Winter Olympics, is an indicator of how both companies and the media can work hand-in-hand to create change in this society. These efforts that are seen, read, and heard through media outlets can influence government policies around the world.

While mainstream media does not hold the opinions of every individual, it is the one domain that can have the largest positive impact on society.

The debate on what is the “proper” media representation of the LGBT community is still ongoing, but there is not doubt that major companies’ positive actions can create a domino effect on other companies to follow suit. In this day and age, showing public support via media platforms is vital in order to effectively communicate any message, especially one of equality.

China cracks down on foreign reporters

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

Reporting news in China has always been a sticky situation but even more recently, there has been in influx of rejected visas for foreign journalists who report within the country.

Even journalists who have worked in the field for years in China are now receiving rejections towards renewed visas. This is forcing people who have been living there for their journalism profession to leave and find new jobs elsewhere.

This issue is also forcing many journalists who have not had their visa renewals rejected to reconsider how they report news. Most have decided that they need to take part in self-censorship, but is that really reporting the news? There have also been reports of death threats towards foreign journalists who are reporting things that are not necessarily agreed with by citizens of China. This can also affect how journalists report news with accuracy.

Local citizen journalists have always been restricted in what they report. Freedom of the press in China is very limited and it has been known that foreign news coverage has always had more freedom to report than Chinese journalists. But nowadays it is becoming more evident that both foreign and local reporters are becoming one in the same.

During the past 10 years, many Western media companies have increased their coverage of China. Companies like The New York Times and the BBC have created blogs strictly dedicated to the country. This investment reflects China’s growing significance as an important country in international affairs. China requires attention from the media. But as a result, this has given China more leverage over the foreign media than it once had.

One of the main reasons for this type of crackdown on foreign coverage is that China does not want the world to know about the relationship its big business and politics have with each other. In the end, it’s all about money. But it is argued that in doing so, China is harming its ties in foreign affairs. If China is kicking out journalists from other countries for unfriendly reporting, it causes those countries to question China’s relations with them.

As China gains more wealth, it is becoming more and more apparent that other things, like foreign news coverage, do not matter because the Chinese leaders know they have leverage over other countries. This is bad news for journalists who have ties in China when it comes to reporting.

American journalism as it Is today

By MATIAS WODNER

A recent Los Angeles Times article about a well-known author caught my attention because of a quotation within the article. Michael Lewis, author of The Blind Side and Moneyball was attributed with the quote:

“Going from American journalism to British journalism is like going from bratwurst to Mexican food,” he says. “You go from feeling kind of constipated to feeling like you got the runs.”

In addition to being a funny comment, it is also a bit of a scary one to think about, at least from a journalistic perspective. If I’ve learned anything about the news media and about journalism over the past couple years or so, it’s that it is in a state of flux. It isn’t doing well, it isn’t doing horribly, but no one is really sure what to think of it. It has also been challenged in many ways due to ethical problems and controversial scenarios.

And that’s from my perspective in North America.

With that being said, the fact that a respected writer like Lewis is saying that the British side of things is worse off makes me a little uneasy. Not because I plan on moving to Great Britain, but because it means that journalism in America can get even worse. It isn’t overly something to worry about at the moment, and there is still some fine journalism going around, but there is a lot of poor journalism as well.

Fake stories, wrong sourcing, poor grammar, the list goes on. With this booming technological age that we are in, there will undoubtedly be bad journalism. Being first to break a story has become more important than delivering journalistic gold that takes patience.

I’m not sure what it will take to get back to the golden age of journalism or whether we ever will again. But we can at least report the truth, and do it eloquently. Then maybe some of the bad journalists will be scraped out.