Tag Archives: Journalism

Site exposes false facts online

Posted on by

By MEAGHAN McCLURE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Crackdown on China’s journalists

Posted on by

By GABRIELLA CANAL

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

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

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

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

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

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

9/11 Memorial fire coverage varies

Posted on by

By SHAWNA KHALAFI

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

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

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

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

Interactive storytelling, our future

Posted on by

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.

Biased journalism blames the victim

Posted on by

By LINDSAY THOMPSON

By now, most people have heard about the case of missing University of Virginia student Hannah Graham. Around 1 a.m. on Saturday, Sept. 13, she texted friends saying she was lost. That was the last anyone has heard from her since that day.

Police are still trying to figure out exactly what happened to Hannah and where she is. In just the past few days, they have found a person of interest who is currently in custody.

All of that information can be found by just Googling Hannah’s name. What you will also find when you search for her are articles with titles like, “Missing student Hannah Graham was so drunk she could barely walk, says owner of bar where she was last seen – as man accused of her kidnap appears in court” (http://dailym.ai/1sRprF8).

A journalist’s job is to report the news in an unbiased way and giving articles titles such as the one previously listed is anything but unbiased. That title almost shifts the blame onto Hannah. It makes it easier to think “Well, it’s her fault for not being more careful,” when that’s just not the case.

People can come to their own assumptions about her life, but that is not the job of the media. Hannah very well may have been extremely drunk, and there is nothing wrong with articles stating that she had been out that night (because that’s the truth and is part of the story).

However, making that the whole subject of the article detracts from the fact that she is still missing, and they may have found the man who kidnapped her – which is really what’s important.

It’s not the news media’s job to judge her life choices. It’s their job to clearly report what’s happening.

Using anonymous sources in reporting

Posted on by

By KATHERINE FERNANDES

For a long list of reasons, it is better to use the names of sources that are willing to be quoted in an news article. However, sometimes sources don’t want their names to be revealed because they have fear of the valuable information they’re giving.

As an ethical rule, journalists should not reveal a person’s identity unless that person gives consent. Nonetheless, frequent use of anonymous sources has become a controversial issue.

If, for example, you are reporting a story on a city mayor who is stealing money from the city and you find a knowledgeable source that works with the mayor. The source tells you everything the mayor does and reveals he or she is stealing money. Then, the source gives you details about the mayor’s corrupt activities but tells you to keep his identity secret because otherwise he would get fired.

If you want to be a professional journalist and keep your job, you must be willing to keep that promise of not revealing the source’s name even if you confront extreme pressure to reveal this confidential information.

When a journalist wants to uncover a big secret and produce a good story of public interest, anonymous sources are often key for revealing these quality stories.

Nevertheless, the protection of source’s identities can result in journalists facing jail and paying fines for contempt of court charges. If journalists want to avoid jail or fines, judges can make them reveal information even when it has been promised to keep the secret.

According to the Society of Professional Journalists, the legal protection provided to journalists to protect confidential sources is not 100 percent secure. “Judith Miller, a New York Times journalist, for example, spent three months in jail for refusing to identify the source of the leak that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.”

The right of journalists to use and not reveal confidential sources is being debated. Some police officers and judges tend to argue that journalists have no right to make people anonymous and protect their information when these sources are subject of crime investigation.

Anonymity is a serious matter in journalism. Journalists are being more pressured than ever to reveal secret sources. As future journalists, we have to resist this pressure in order to maintain our ethical standards in this profession.

Capturing the attention of the public

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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.

Is the iPhone 6 Plus bendable?

Posted on by

By MICHELLE BERTRAN

It appears to be that iPhone 6 Plus users are complaining about their new phone being bent after keeping it in the pockets of their pants for a while, especially if you are wearing tight pants. Apple has not responded to this issue, according to CNNMoney.

People all over the world are posting pictures and comments in regard to this in the hashtag #BendGate. However, many of these images seem to be Photoshopped and last year, there were some reports of the 5s having the same problem, so this is nothing new to Apple.

Now the question is, if you have a $750 phone, why would you sit on it while it is in your pocket? Or should the phone be extremely durable (almost invincible) if that is the retail price?

I think it goes both ways. If I paid that much for a phone, I would take much better care of it and keep it in my purse, rather than in my tight jeans where it can easily slip out of my pocket (considering how big it is) or sit on it.

Meanwhile, for a phone that expensive, it shouldn’t be so sensitive to the point where one can easily bend it with one’s own two hands. But iPhone 6 Plus owners should take into consideration that this phone is made up of aluminum; a material that is rather flexible.

There was a video posted on YouTube by Unbox Therapy where it shows a man trying to bend the iPhone with his bare hands. The man on the video said that being able to bend the phone with your hands is a matter of strength, but definitely possible. In an email to CNNMoney he said, “Grab it in the middle with the glass facing out and give it everything you have, it’ll bend.”

White House tries to control watchdogs

Posted on by

By AUDREY WINKELSAS

Earlier this week, Paul Farhi with The Washington Post reported cases of the White House demanding that members of its press-pool change their reports.

The White House functions on a system whereby a small group of journalists known as pool reporters receive exclusive access to presidential events. The reports of these journalists are e-mailed to a database, including news outlets, for them to use in stories nationwide.

The pool reporters share their reports with the White House press office, which is responsible for distributing them to the members of the database. Reporters say this office has forced changes in reports before their release to media outlets. Essentially, the White House is trying to control which information is circulated and allowing only the coverage it sees as favorable.

The press, commonly referred to as the fourth branch of government, is supposed to be a check on government. How can journalists be watchdogs if their content is being reviewed?

In the majority of cases, a journalist should not allow his/her sources to review an article prior to publication, as this would give the source undue power over the journalist. It is the journalist’s responsibility to report as accurately as possible that occasionally provides an exception to this rule.

Such an example would be when writing an article concerning a complex subject, such as astrophysics. Since the journalist is not an astrophysicist, he may need to verify the accuracy of his report with the expert source.

The changes being demanded by the White House press office are not complex matters. In fact, they are oftentimes quite trivial, such as a statement that an intern fainted during a press briefing. It is the principle of government infringement on freedom of the press under fire here.

Why do we report celebrity gossip?

Posted on by

By LINDSAY THOMPSON

All over Internet news sources and on TV broadcasts today, you’ll probably hear something about “Celebrity Phone Hackings! Nude Photos Leaked!” If you stay up to date with current events, there is really no way you did not hear about this. It’s posted everywhere.

Why should we care that Jennifer Lawrence’s phone was hacked, or that Kate Middleton is pregnant, or that Kris and Bruce Jenner are getting a divorce?

There are people who have built their whole career around reporting celebrity gossip (hello, Perez Hilton.) Yet bloggers, gossip columns, and E! News aren’t the only ones talking about celebrities. The story of Kate Middleton’s second pregnancy was featured on ABC’s World News.

It’s a journalist’s job to help inform people about what’s going on in the world and what the public should generally know. Still, journalists also report what they know people want to hear. Most TV news broadcasts will have some type of human interest piece thrown in, and giving people the low down on what’s happening in Hollywood is an easy way to fill that.

If it’s possible to have a whole station like E! News devoted just to stirring up the celebrity rumor mill, clearly enough people want to know what’s happening in celebrities’ lives. But why?

It’s nice to know that celebrities are people, too. They get divorced, they have their phones hacked, they’re caught with drugs and have to go to court. They’re not untouchable.

Not only that, but everyone knows who these celebrities are, and it’s easy to talk about someone you know. The general public probably isn’t going to care if your cousin is being shipped off to rehab (unless there was some weird twist to thicken the plot of the story,) because they don’t know your cousin. It’s sometimes easy to feel like you actually know someone just because you have seen all of their movies, or watched a few of their interviews on daytime television.

As long as people are still tuning in to hear about celebrity news, reporters are still going to talk about it.

Inside the CNN studio tour

Posted on by

By DOMENICA A. LEONE

One place certainly every aspiring journalist should visit is Atlanta. The capital of, and the most populous city, in Georgia is home to massive media operations and newsrooms power houses recognized worldwide.

It was in this city were the legendary Ted Turner would begin the Turner Broadcasting System and  establish the headquarters of the infamous “Cable News Network”; better recognized today by the simple acronym of CNN .

These days, the CNN Center is adjacent to the Centennial Olympic Park in downtown Atlanta and is open to anyone who is down for a taste of what real world journalists undergo on a day-to-day basis. It allows visitors to get a feel for what goes on behind the scenes during news gathering and broadcasting as well as an insight into the various CNN networks. Notably, the center is responsible for instructing the ordinary citizen on how dignifying the world of news coverage and reporting can be.

431929_10152751416178134_8760692127951284375_n

CNN center: home to the world’s largest freestanding escalator

Along the approximately 55-minute guided walking tour; one is able to peek into the newsroom, control room, studios and headquarters main hallways.

The tour begins on a long ride up the world’s largest freestanding escalator as recognized by Guinness World Records. The 196-feet long and eight stories high escalator used to take visitors up to “The World of Sid and Marty Krofft,” an indoor amusement park, but is now CNN’s main newsroom.

You’ll find a replica of a CNN newsroom studio set when landing on the base after that long flight up. While you are waiting for the tour to begin, you’ll be able to videotape or photograph yourself broadcasting breaking news stories as an anchor.

As the tour begins, you’ll access a control room replica of the headquarters’ cable-TV news service, which is actually located on the same spot three stories below. Guests are instructed on the main concepts and activities that take place under this technical hub, allowing them to experience the behind-the-scenes elements of a news broadcast.

10441958_10152751416883134_8403776665373654303_nNext, you’ll visit one of the many CNN spin-off cable news channel studios, HLN’s (“Headline News”) Studio 7E.

This special-effects studio demonstrates visitors the technology that goes into the production of news. For example, the use of a teleprompter, on-air graphics with the aid of a green screen and high-tech touch screen are explained.

Although the tour will involve traveling down many levels of stairs, the following station is totally worthy to get to. A glass-wall on the building’s main hallway will allow you to catch a panoramic view of the main CNN studio, Studio 7. Actually, this is the largest studio CNN has ever built anywhere in the world and, if you are lucky enough you might even catch someone working on air.

10665667_10152751416843134_638452646018851032_nAfter touring the on-camera presence sites you’ll be redirected to the equivalent of a “chem-lab” for a journalist; the newsroom.

Here you are able to take a bird’s-eye view of both the main CNN and HNL newsroom as people downstairs are on working-mode. This is actually were the magic happens, because it is here were writers compose the news scripts after long processes of gathering and verifying information. In other words they are the responsible for the accuracy and relevance of the facts that households will eventually receive.

Exiting through another of the building hallways you will soon find yourself in front of other of the CNN en Espanol and HNL’s studios were, again if lucky, you might be able to catch an anchor and support crew on duty.

Soon after, you are dismissed, but not after being thanked for your visit. Of course, then you are redirected to the souvenir store where you are able to find amazing merchandise all encrypted on one way or another with the iconic reddish acronym.

Although such tour might sound as fun, it is really just the simplest of the bunch the place has to offer.  If you prefer a more extensive (and therefore expensive) VIP tour, you would actually get the chance to step out onto the main CNN newsroom floor and explore production areas that are not normally accessible to the public.

There’s also the possibility for you to go behind the scenes of HLN’s popular morning show, “Morning Express with Robin Meade” on another of the packages.

10609530_10152751415863134_9059171804339138202_nNo matter your choice, visiting this news landmark will definitely add to your knowledge and experience.

If you are not news savvy, you’ll learn the basics and, if an aspiring journalist, it will complement your understandings and light a beacon of persistence and perseverance to get a job on the spot (because it sure did in me!).

Getting to go inside Atlanta’s CNN headquarters is certainly an once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Not to mention a game changer.

The news media: Are we hypocrites?

Posted on by

By MEAGHAN McCLURE

An article published by The American Spectator on Sept. 23 raises an interesting point: Journalists are just as at fault in domestic violence cases as the NFL players they have been recently criticizing.

During the month of September, the news media have had a frenzy with all of the domestic violence and child abuse cases surrounding the NFL. With the release of the second Ray Rice surveillance tape, Adrian Peterson’s child abuse scandal, combined with notable cases against Greg Hardy, Jonathan Dwyer, and Ray McDonald, media during the month of September have put the NFL on blast for all of these domestic violence issues.

The article by The American Spectator, however, asks the question: Are the media skewing these problems out of proportion, just because the NFL is a high-profile, very exposed institution?

It is possible that the NFL does not have more domestic violence cases in ratio than the rest of the country. Actually, in studies, it is found that the NFL actually has lower crime rates than the rest of the general population of the same age group. The difference is the media puts more of a spotlight on professional athletes’ faults, rather than the average Joe. Not saying this makes the NFL violence cases okay, but it is fair to point out that it may be overemphasized by the media.

While the media have been constantly criticizing the league and painting it as “a veritable athletic Evil Empire of domestic abuse,” according to the article, The American Spectator points the finger back at those same journalists, who are not in positions to be putting the blame on others.

Five NFL cases, as mentioned before, have put the pressure on the NFL to better itself from the violence-ridden entity it appears to be now. As the article points out, however, ten cases can be found within the media recently. This is twice as many as the NFL.

These cases range from ESPN to ABC, CBS, NBC, and The New York Times. The difference between these cases and those of the NFL? Domestic violence cases by the media aren’t lumped together for the public to over-scrutinize and cast a shadow over all of the media.

I’m not saying at all that the NFL shouldn’t be concerned about its role with domestic violence. It should be. Domestic violence is never okay, and with so many fans looking to the NFL, it should make a good example of these cases, taking measures to punish the offenders.

However, maybe the media should do the same and take a second look to try to better itself, before pointing fingers at others.

You can read The American Spectator article mentioned here: http://spectator.org/articles/60468/when-journalists-commit-domestic-violence.

After arrest, Kevin Olsen departs UM

Posted on by

By MICHELLE BERTRAN

The University of Miami’s third string quarterback Kevin Olsen started off the season rocky by being suspended from the season opener game because of a failed drug test. He is now suspended from the team and is no longer a student at the university as a result to a DUI and a stolen or fake license arrest that occurred early Monday morning. To make matters worse, this is his second DUI charge. Olsen’s first came when he was in high school.

Monday morning he was caught with six licenses. One belonged to teammate Ronald Regula, another was a fake license from Maryland, and the others were from four different states. Olsen refused to take a urine test and failed a breathalyzer test by registering a .04. He was released on a $6,000 bond that same day.

Al Golden released a statement Monday night on Olsen’s departure.

“Right now, this is about Kevin and his family and we need to respect that,’’ Golden said. “He needs this time to look at himself and move forward, and I have no doubt that with the support of his family, his brothers, his mom and dad, and obviously those of us that know him really well, there’s no question that he’s going to have the right ending.… He’s going to win in the end.’’

Olsen had an opportunity at being Miami’s starting quarterback when Ryan Williams tore his ACL this past spring. Olsen’s scholarship can now be given to someone that will make the most out of the opportunity of not only playing for “The U,” but also being a student here.

Are phones killing photojournalism?

Posted on by

By LINDSAY THOMPSON

I dare you to find someone who does not have a camera on their phone. With how popular smart phones are, it’s next to impossible. Even my 90-year-old grandpa’s flip phone has a camera on it (not that he knows how to use it).

Since camera phones are so popular, there is usually always someone around who can take a photo of an even right as it happens.

There are a lot more everyday people with camera phones than there are photojournalists. The exact moment when an event occurs, it is much more likely that someone with a camera phone will be there versus a photojournalist waiting to get the shot.

I do not think an amateur with an iPhone will be able to completely replace a professional photojournalist. The quality and composition of a professionally shot photo will never go out of style; People will always want to see that, but it’s not always an option.

If we look back on 9/11 and the coverage of the event, you can find tons of beautifully shot, powerful images expression the horror everyone felt that day, or showcasing the bravery of some American heroes.

However, there are shaky, blurry videos and images shot by people just walking along the street that we are shown over and over again, because these images captured the exact moment that the first plane hit the North Tower.

No one knew this was going to happen, so no professional photojournalists were on assignment or expecting to cover the first tower, like they were for events later than day and week.

Back in 2001, camera phones were not even available. Most of the videos and images of the first tower were shot with digital cameras. If this event occurred 2014 instead of 2001, there would be a lot more coverage because everyone has a camera phone they can just whip out.

Not only are the availability of camera phones decreasing the need for photojournalists, but social media is making it extremely simple to share these images with the world. You no longer need to work for TIME Magazine for everyone to see your photos, you can just share it on Instagram or Twitter or Facebook.

Still, photojournalists will always be needed. There are some places your Average Joe with an iPhone will not be able or willing to go to. There are very few people brave enough to do what James Foley did, for example. However, camera phones are cutting down this need for photojournalists, since they are proving to be better at documenting breaking, unexpected news.

Journalism and social media’s influence

Posted on by

By AUTUMN ROBERTSON

This September has been a great news month for many journalists. The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has captured more towns and oil fields in Syria and President Barack Obama has made an executive decision to soon deploy troops into the area to fight ISIS. The Ebola outbreak in West Africa continues to spread and the president made executive decision after the ISIS news to deploy troops to the area to “fight” the disease.

However, I heard more about certain news stories than others and I can’t help to think that the result was from social media. I saw more articles and think pieces on both NFL stars Ray Rice, who was accused of domestic violence, and Adrian Peterson, who is facing child abuse charges, than any of the executive decisions that President Barack Obama made and many other political policy news.

Is it because they monitor what people are talking about on social media and chase the more dramatic, sensationalist stories in order to sell papers and get page clicks?

The “trending meter” on Twitter and Facebook are important tools for a journalist. They can see what people are talking about from a regional, national and worldwide standpoint. I sat and monitored what people were talking about on twitter these past two weeks, and I saw more tweets about the athletes than tweets about politics.

Why is it that generally we are more concerned about scandals than issues that can directly affect our nation? Because we are more concerned about these shocking events, stories about national government issues are being flooded out by the journalists who write about those shocking events. I am not saying that the Rice and Peterson stories lack importance; personally, I am glad that the stories were reported because each lead to powerful discussions about domestic violence and abuse. However, more and more people know every detail about those stories, but lack proper knowledge on ISIS and the affect they have on our country. Is social media more of a clutch for journalists than a useful tool?

Social media play an important impact on journalism and what news the media feel is more important to cover. However, should journalists be so influenced by the people that use social media that they choose to write stories based on what’s trending?

News under the radar

Posted on by

By EMILY JOSEPH

After analyzing the news this week, I found that the overwhelming majority of stories focused on sports (particularly the NFL domestic abuse scandal) and ISIS.

While I personally have an interest in sports and have been keeping up with the ISIS crisis, I’ve also read many other stories that I consider very important. What concerns me is that these stories are very under-the-radar and I’ve seen them get pushed to the end of the news segment. That, or they don’t have the amount of coverage I think they deserve.

For example, this week President Obama announced that the U.S. will be sending troops to West Africa and investing $88 million to help fight the Ebola virus. Also, I’m sure you’ve heard about the wild weather on the West Coast, but did you know just how severe the flooding has been? How about the wildfires in California?

These are just a few examples of recent headlines. Now I don’t blame the journalists or reporters who cover these “smaller” stories because I actually think the American public is generally to blame for what makes the top headlines. The journalists are just giving the public what it wants: drama. 

Americans gravitate to stories involving drama. The NFL scandal and ISIS crisis are both very pressing and important issues, but they just so happen to have a rollercoaster of events. Not one domestic abuse case but several. Not one beheading but more. These topics would make headlines regardless of the public interest (because they are important!), but it’s the every minute coverage that detracts from the other news.

Maybe if Americans showed interest in and concern for other topics, the news headlines would follow. I don’t know if this is a problem or just over-analysis, but nevertheless, the top news stories all do an oddly good job at maintaining drama.

Native advertising: Killing the free press?

Posted on by

By DYLAN WEEMS

With the gradual shift of news from the traditional hard-copy paper format to online journalism, advertisers have found it much more difficult to reach readers.

According to a study done by the Rich Media Gallery, banner advertisements on websites are clicked on purposefully only 0.17% of the time. Now, in an effort to increase the viewing of advertisements, companies have turned to a strategy known as native advertising. It is a strategy that essentially takes an ad and disguises it as a news story.

Native advertising has many journalists worried that the news industry as we know it will die. Independent journalism could nearly vanish if other companies are able to interject their advertisements into real news stories. The popular website BuzzFeed is notorious for this. One hundred percent of its revenue comes from “branding content.” This means that there are articles such as “9 Ways Cleaning Has Become Smarter”… sponsored by Swiffer.

Arguments have been made that “as long as the reader knows the difference between a news article and native advertising, there shouldn’t be a problem.” However, less than half of readers actually can discern the difference because the entire point of the ad is to disguise itself as a news story.

BuzzFeed is not the only website guilty of utilizing native advertising. Even The New York Times ran a “story” on women’s prisons that was really a promotion for season two of the popular TV show “Orange is the New Black.”

Finally, there is some fault to the reader here. The best way to get rid of native advertising is to start paying for online news, but it seems that no one is willing to do that because the Internet is just too convenient.

Obviously, no one really what the full extent of native advertising will be just yet. Only time will tell. Hopefully, the days of a free and independent press in America are not over.

theSkimm: The future of reporting?

Posted on by

By LINDSAY THOMPSON

In this digital age, there are a million ways to read the news: turn on the TV, go online, download an app, and even check your e-mail. The last option is becoming increasingly popular, with newsletter like “theSkimm” popping up.

theSkimm is a daily newsletter summing up important current events, written in a sassy tone to appeal to their target demographic, city-dwelling females ages 18 to 34.

The newsletter is simple way to stay up to date and the summaries are written in an interesting way that keeps their audience reading about topics they may not otherwise be interested in.

“We are reaching our readers in the way they want to be reached and they are making us a part of their daily routine,” said Danielle Weisberg, co-founder of theSkimm.

The newsletter’s motto is: “We read. You skimm.” This means that you don’t get all the facts. Still, we are a generation that wants everything fast, easy, and now, while needing to put fourth minimal effort to attain it. This is exactly what theSkimm gives you. It comes right to your e-mail’s inbox, so you don’t have to hunt down the information, and gives it to you very short and sweet.

So, is skimming going to become the future of reporting? If quickly reading over short newsletters were to become how everyone reads the news, possibly important information could be lost or withheld from our knowledge. Not every story can be summed up in one nice, little paragraph. More often than not, readers need background information and longer explanations to understand everything that is going on with complicated topics such as politics and foreign affairs.

For now, theSkimm seems to have no plans of taking over the reporting world.

“We’re really not a place for people to go to see breaking news and that’s been a luxury,” Weisberg said in an interview with the Huffington Post (http://huff.to/1pp5mmO).

theSkimm continues to grow in popularity, reaching 500,000 subscribers this past July after existing for only two years. The future of news is changing, and it may be headed in the direction of theSkimm.

Responsibility for rising reporters

Posted on by

By GABRIELLA CANAL

Have you ever seen the way a piece of meat is cut? The shredding and vicious motion? It is with great disgust that I parallel that to the tragic decapitation of American-Israeli journalist, Steven Sotloff.

I, along with hundreds of other unprepared Americans, mistakenly clicked that play button on Sept. 2. The memory of it still haunts me.

The horror of it all, the stark reality of the video forced me to take a step back and gather my thoughts: what do I do now?

Three years in at the School of Communication at UM and I feel I am three years too deep to go back. More importantly, I have always known I’ve wanted to be a writer. I’ve always known I’ve wanted to shed light on truth and step out of my comfort zone. I didn’t always know I wanted to be a war correspondent, but I did know I wanted to be an international correspondent. And I’ve always known I’m not the only one.

To the millions of you who are drowning in story leads and paper cuts, who are declared journalism majors and aspiring writers, I ask you: What roles will we play in the war? (Should there still be a war when we’re working journalists, that is).

Will our allegiances lie with the American audience or the global audience? And how will we set our priorities?

Ernie Pyle, a journalist for Scripps Howard during World War II, was assigned six months overseas in North Africa. With the humor of Mark Twain and a voice similar to that of Ernest Hemingway, he wrote personal, relatable columns about the GIs he came to live with. Eventually, he died alongside those GIs after being hit by Japanese machine gun fire.

“The Writing 69th” were the first reporters ever to ride shotgun in a bomber through a bombing raid over Germany during World War II. Robert Post of The New York Times died on that fateful mission.

In more recent news, James Foley and Steven Sotloff were both freelance journalists during the Syrian civil war when they were abducted for ransom and eventually used as chess pieces in an upsetting power play. Pyle, Post, Foley and Sotloff are only four of the hundreds we do or do not know about.

For the longest time, the war correspondent has faced conflicting morals. The question of responsibility in wartime has always lied between wanting to swim against the tide of public opinion and wanting to talk about the heroes and the patriotic highlights.

Now, I believe, that question of responsibility has changed to wanting to find the next big conflict to report to a global audience and wanting to maintain self-preservation and safety.

Julian Reichelt, a freelance writer who was in the same area as Sotloff on the day he was taken in Aleppo, admits that “all journalists in war zones operate on the assumption that bad things are what happens to other people.”

How far will we go anymore and what fuels our crazed quest to throw ourselves into the midst of chaos? More importantly, who are we throwing ourselves in the flames for? The majority of the American reporters in the Middle East today appear to be freelance writers. Is it for their country, or an international audience, or is it perhaps for themselves?