Has journalism fallen?

By VALERIA VIERA

Theodore Dawes explains in his article “The Fall of Journalism” that people tend to think that the newspaper is the product and that people are the customers. He says it is the other way around, stating that “advertisers are the customer and reader attention is the product.”

He explains that for years he has asked the same question: “Why are newspapers published?” and says he has received no good answer. To him, the real answer is because it makes money for the publisher.

Dawes believes that it is all driven by advertising and is about money, not really about the structure of it and those well-written articles, pointing out that he has “never taken a course in journalism, which I regard as a boon to my career and particularly to my reporting.”

This is an interesting point of view by a journalist himself, also expressing the relationship between newspaper owners and reporters; this first one taking advantage of reporters.

“Newspaper owners have for centuries utilized this leaning to pay reporters peanuts.  In fact, reporters are the lowest paid among occupations that require a college degree. In most places they earn 40-50 percent less than the local librarian. The newspaper owners benefit greatly from the naiveté of those in their newsroom.  They’re not going to say a word.”

This caught my attention because it should not be like that since reporters are primarily the ones who find something newsworthy for people and who are making an impact in the audience.

Dawes has another interesting point of view regarding journalism: he does not believe there exists such thing as “journalistic objectivity,” which is “a significant principle of journalistic professionalism that can refer to fairness, disinterestedness, factuality, and nonpartisanship, but most often encompasses all of these qualities.” He states that people believe they are reading the objective news, when in fact they are not: “Objective news was and remains a joke, but Americans continue to believe it exists.”

There are many points of view in society about what journalism is or should be, and many people out there who have different opinions and ways to look at the profession as a whole. But we journalists have to keep in mind that no matter what it is said, we always stick to the basics of professional journalism: write the truth and only the truth. Be honest to your audience and always give them something newsworthy for them to read about.

You can read more at: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/the_fall_of_journalism.html#ixzz2kv7Asr6y

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.

Misunderstanding others’ opinions

By MARISSA YOUNG

On Tuesday, Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen faced allegations that he himself made a racist comment, when in fact he was expressing the views of some of the subjects of his article.

The exact quote he used was that “people with conventional views must repress a gag reflex when considering the mayor-elect of New York — a white man married to a black woman and with two biracial children.”

The problem is that Cohen was trying to convey the sentiments of a particular group of people separate from himself, but readers confused this with a statement of his own opinion.

This is one hardship of journalism.  If we are writing about controversial topics, we are going to have to express others’ opinions that we do not share (or that we do share but do not wish to disclose).  How do we avoid being called “racist” or “sexist” when we are only retransmitting someone else’s message?

The task is not an easy one.  Some readers automatically perceive what they read to be the opinion of the author.  These people might be stubborn and hard to convince otherwise, no matter what you do.

With people who don’t jump to this conclusion, journalists can be overly clear that they are not the ones with the thoughts they are writing or speaking.  Stress your sources.  In situations when you might be tempted to write “many believe that” or “some think that,” reconsider this.  Instead, wherever possible, insert the identity of the party, such as the name of a group or a specific individual you are quoting.  This should take as much suspicion off of you as possible.

Still, no matter how hard you try, it is difficult to tell how readers will view others’ opinions you write about.  People, like journalists, are always looking for drama.  The more scandalous an issue, the more scandalous it would be for you to express your own unpopular beliefs.  People tend to see what they want to see, which is not always what is actually there.  Unfortunately, to maintain your professionalism, you cannot write in block letters “I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE STATEMENTS THAT I QUOTE IN THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE” at the top of your story.

Just as fiction authors do not necessarily share the same experiences as their narrators, journalists do not always hold the same opinions as their articles’ subjects.  As the saying goes, don’t shoot the messenger.

One of the cardinal rules of journalism

By MELANIE MARTINEZ

When it comes to writing and journalism, there is an almost unspoken rule that reigns among the industry workers, one so obvious but also so grave, and desperately avoided at all costs.

Plagiarism, that scary word we learned in middle school when we started writing papers, still sends nervous little shots down my spine. My teachers always warned me about it, explaining the huge consequences of stealing someone else’s work. It always made me think twice before copying and pasting those paragraphs off of Wikipedia…

It wasn’t until I entered high school and had to write research papers that I learned how serious plagiarism really is. The realization came with maturity and a new-found common sense that wasn’t quite present in my braces-laden prepubescent years.

Later when I discovered my love and appreciation for writing, I realized how wrong it’d be to steal someone else’s words, or to have someone steal my own. Majoring in journalism in college has only cemented this strong belief of mine.

As silly as it seems to be harping on and on about why plagiarism is wrong, you’d be surprised at how many people copy others’ work. I know fellow students who see nothing wrong with copying a few sentences here, and paraphrasing a few there. And when I say paraphrasing, I mean switching around a few words to make it seem a bit different.

But it’s not just students who are plagiarizing their college papers. A freelance writer for the local newspaper The Press and Journal plagiarized her column from The Guardian, The Daily Mail, and The Spectator.

Carly Fallon’s story about the upcoming winter season has whole paragraphs that are completely taken word-for-word from other writers. And then paraphrasing was taken to a whole other level of definition-changing.

Sentences such as “When the first snowflake hits the ground, everything transforms. Trains seize up. Schools close,” were ‘paraphrased’ into “And then, when the first snowflake hits the ground, everything transforms. Schools close; trains seize up.” The lazy senior might look at this as simply paraphrasing, but really it is just straight out plagiarism.

Fallon was fired from the paper, and I’m sure utterly humiliated. Did she really think she could get away with copying a WHOLE story, from not one, not two, but THREE writers?

Moral of the story is: write your own stuff. If you can’t come up with anything from your own brain to spill out as words onto your laptop screen, you should probably pick another career.

Typhoon Haiyan reporters risk their lives

By DANIELLE COHEN

Typhoon Haiyan was one of the powerful storms to ever be recorded and is believed to be the strongest typhoon to ever make landfall in human history.

With 10,000 deaths already confirmed by local officials and the reports of many that are left homeless and hungry, it is pretty clear how dangerous and destructive this storm actually was.

With storms and natural disasters, although it may be extremely dangerous, someone has to be the reporter to go to the location and actually report what is going on to benefit the world’s public knowledge and awareness. The reporter could potentially risk his or her life for the sake of reporting information.

A Filipino reporter named Atom Araullo has become an Internet sensation for being a strong reporter and actually going out in the mist of the typhoon to make live reports. He was beaten up by 379 km/h winds, according to NASA.

The reporter was reporting for ABS-CBN News and is now considered a hero on social media for being the brave reporter to face the storm.

The footage of the storm that Araullo reported live has gone viral on YouTube and has been viewed more than one million times.

Hours after the broadcast, Araullo was trending on Twitter.

The cameraman who recorded Araullo is also being recognized even though there is no information on his identity.

Because one reporter broadcast this information competitive stations also sent reporters to this dangerous natural disaster sight to report.

Jamela Alidogan, who reported live from the storm’s hardest hit city, Tacolban, and shared her horrifying story of how she almost did not survive the storm while reporting about the typhoon.

She told her story about how she went to the second story of a building and hung from the metal ceiling beams in a closet with many others for about an hour to remain safe until the ceiling actually started to give way. The roof eventually collapsed and there was a loud noise. She managed to hide in one of the closet shelves while the eye of the storm was just above her. She was prepared to jump, but decided to wait for help until the water and winds died down.

“I have covered armed conflict, but there is nothing like this, nothing as incredible and scary as covering a natural disaster like Typhoon Haiyan,” Alidogan stated in her report.

Reporters have an extremely important job of supplying news stations and the public with information that in situations like a national disaster is scarce and powerful. Reporters risk their lives to supply this information and it just shows the importance and necessity of the news as a source of information. Just one piece of footage of something this detrimental can summon millions.

For more information visit: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/521290/20131111/typhoon-haiyan-yolanda-philippines-atom-araullo-report.htm and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/11/al-jazeera-reporter-typhoon-haiyan_n_4255916.html?utm_hp_ref=media

War zones dangerous for journalists

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

The bodies of two French journalists were returned to France on Tuesday. They had been kidnapped right after conducting an interview on Saturday in Mali.

Both reporters worked for Radio France International and they had been interviewing a Tuareg rebel near the town of Kidal.

Because of France’s decision to intervene in Mali, the French military secured the area around Kidal, which is why it was thought to be safe for the French journalists.

Both were shoved into a car by four men and were found dead soon after.

An Italian journalist was returned home safely recently after being abducted as well.

He is La Stampa’s war correspondent and entered Syria in April. He had been kidnapped for months before finally being released.

It has been reported that Syria is the most dangerous place in the world for journalists. The government has expressed their opposition towards professional journalists, citizen and international alike.

According the Committee to Protect Journalists, 32 journalists have been killed and at least 12 abducted in Syria in the past 12 months.

These kinds of things happen all the time with journalists. War zones are an extremely dangerous place in general, but journalists are at times targets. This can be traced back throughout history and it only seems to get worse.

With this being said, why do journalists continue to go overseas to these overly dangerous areas?

It is simply this: the world deserves to know what is going on in these war zones and it is a journalist’s job to do so.

Personally, I don’t know how these reporters do it though. I don’t think I could ever have the courage to do so.

Being that I would like to become a photographer after college, I have been asked if I would be interested in doing war photography. The answer is no because of these tragedies that occur in these countries with internal conflict.

Journalists have to be strong people in order to report about things of this nature, but actually having to go to the place and live there for long amounts of time in order to get the story takes a large amount of bravery.

I look up to the photographers who go over to these zones of conflict and take pictures of what’s going on and I have nothing but respect for the ones who have lost their lives.

Journalism isn’t dying, it’s changing

By MELANIE MARTINEZ

Every holiday party or family get-together, it’s always the same thing. My relatives and their friends ask about boys and school. While my love life has fluctuated more than Oprah’s waistline (no offense, O) my college career has always been steady and focused. When asked about my major, I proudly reply, “Journalism,” which is always met with faces twisted in horror and concern.

“But honey, journalism is a dying career! Everybody knows that.”

Cue my usual exasperated sigh and excuse to beeline towards the snack table. I can feel their worried glances on my back. Poor thing. She needs to study a real major. 

I know my Com School peers have experienced similar fright-filled responses. But do not fret my fellow journalism majors, as I’m sure you know, there is no need to switch over to something “more reliable” like engineering or accounting … we all suck at math anyways.

It is true that the journalism industry is currently going through major changes, but that doesn’t mean that it’s dying out and that reporters are going extinct.

On the contrary, BLS data shows that the number of help-wanted ads for “news analysts, reporters, and correspondents” has increased by 15 percent compared to last year. More people are telling BLS that they have careers as news analysts, reporters and correspondents compared to a year ago.

The Digital Age isn’t taking away journalism jobs, instead it’s simply modifying the description. These help-wanted ads now use words such as “digital,” “Internet” and “mobile.”

And what’s wrong with that? This isn’t the first time journalism and media have withstood major change due to technology. From the emergence of the radio in the twenties to the television takeover in the fifties, journalists have adapted when it comes to times of major change through medium.

As history shows, when technology advances and culture changes, journalists develop new skills to keep up. Journalism hasn’t died out and won’t die out because of this willingness to understand, adapt and learn.

The common idea that “everyone’s a journalist,” due to the prevalence of blogging online, is an inaccurate notion. The news and media industry needs educated journalists capable of interpreting the news and delivering it in the unique way only trained writers and broadcasters can. That’s not to say that raw talent is non-existent, but not everyone has the needed skill set acquired through education.

I believe that journalism will continue to strive in this Internet-centered period due to the fact that young journalists are capable and equipped to handle the shift. They lack the dated habits of their older counterparts and join the industry with a strong grasp of today’s environment.

Instead of collapsing careers, journalism’s changing ways are creating more jobs and opportunities, available to the people who are skilled and opened to them.

So maybe our world is studded with tablets and phones and our eyes are more constantly met with screens than with paper. We will always need people to report and interpret life’s happenings, no matter the outlet. From town crier to Tweet and everything in between, journalism has evolved along with the world and will continue to do so in the ever-changing future.

Press regulation in UK could spread

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

There is an argument going on right now about whether or not press regulation in the United Kingdom is going to destroy journalism or actually prevent journalists from abusing their jobs.

Supporters of the charter say that the press in the UK has failed in self-regulation and that this new charter will be the answer in keeping journalists in check.  The charter includes a number of penalties for when journalists do something they’re not supposed to.

I have read that some people think this charter is a blessing in disguise because it is the best way to keep the government fully off the press’ back. It is a shield that is preventing a full regulation that could for sure affect how journalists do their job.

But many journalists in the UK are angry. There is a battle between the journalists who are for and against the charter. There are some who see it as a compromise with the government, but the others are very angry because they were the ones who were involved in implementing it, instead of stopping it.

I think this is in a way a violation to freedom of the press. Journalists have always had the right to regulate themselves. I understand, however, why they are implementing a charter to regulate and watch over the journalists. In 2012, the UK had incident in where multiple high profile cell phones were hacked by journalists and that is completely wrong.

After reading about this, I was also reminded of Princess Diana’s death and how the paparazzi were a big part of it. I’m sure the UK is just fed up with interference from journalists.

What needs to be watched is that the charter does not abuse their power and take things too far by implementing laws that really do violate journalists’ freedoms. So far it’s borderline, but it can easily be taken to another level.

I also have to wonder if other countries will take a similar route. What if it becomes a domino effect? The U.S. could be next. There could be a charter here as well regulating the press.  The UK has always been known to set a standard. Perhaps this is just the beginning. This could possibly be the future for ALL of journalism around the globe.

Can we ever ensure source identity?

By MARISSA YOUNG

Earlier this week, President Barack Obama’s tweets got hacked by the Syrian Electronic Army (SEA), which has recently hacked other high-profile accounts as well. Though the hack was minor, it is still discomforting.

Disregarding the danger that other countries could infiltrate American government technology, what is disconcerting is this reminder for journalists, and everyone, to be cautious with sources.

If you are interviewing Barack Obama in person, you can probably be sure that it’s really him.  But if you ask a random person on the street for an opinion, can you really be sure he’s giving you his correct name?  Even if you had the time, how would you begin researching him?

How can we tell that our sources are who they say they are?  If they are not high-profile, how can we tell if our sources are real at all?  I wish I had an answer to these questions, but I don’t.  I do have some ideas about how to have the best chance of having reliable sources, and they’re basically common sense.

If possible, meet with your source in person. If you can’t, a video chat or phone call would be the next best things, respectively.  At least you can make judgments about authenticity of speech.  Relying on only textual (i.e., email) communication should be a last resort, but sometimes, you cannot avoid it. Use your best judgment and be careful.  The same goes with using websites and online information. These points are pretty obvious to any journalist, but they are important to remember.

This brings me back to the constant fear that sources, especially online ones, may be unreliable.  The best we can do is always be wary of this possibility, and the chance that, for instance, a website may have been hacked or someone else may have authored an e-mail.  If someone can hack the president’s Twitter account, imagine what else can be hacked.

Steps to being a good journalist, part 2

By VALERIA VIERA

A good journalist also needs a few of other interesting characteristics.

According to the article: ”Journalism – Facts & Directory,” one specific characteristic a journalist must have is to be resourceful. “Resourcefulness gives a person the ability to be able to always find a solution to difficult situations that can sometimes be at a dead end. Being a committed journalist is also important. There are sacrifices that must be made in a journalists’ personal life at times in order to get work done.” This is not only describing resourcefulness but also the virtue of sacrifice.

Sometimes journalists have to put things aside so a good story can be accomplished. Finding stories, news, or anything interesting to the public is something that can take time, even more if the journalist is making the correct steps and gathering the necessary evidence to support the story.

Apart from these characteristics, I believe a good journalist should be considerate. He should know how to talk to people about certain things and how to correctly approach the situation. There are going to be lots of times where a difficult situation will come up, and a good journalist must know what to do and how to handle it without affecting those around him.

Speed and accuracy is also crucial. It is not enough to write well you have to also be a fast writer. This is where many aspiring journalists have problems. They might do well in writing classes and show a good grasp of the news, but when it comes to deadlines they suffer.”  This is also a very important point. Journalists need to be fast and aware at all times, because in one minute your story might be taken, or worst, stolen.

If you as a journalist are not capable of being quick, even if you have the best story, it can lose impact if it is not shared rapidly and through the correct sources. 

Journalists need to know how to work fast, under pressure, but maintaining the accuracy present at all times. “There will be times where editors may yell and you will find yourself in a high-pressure environment, you may have problems with co-workers under similar stress.”

The article also mentions how good journalists turn in a clean copy and do not depend on the editor, which means “they must posses decent spelling and grammar skills.” Also, confidence is one of the most important things to keep in mind. Confidence will get a journalist the answers wanted and it will give he or she the sufficient strength to “take that extra step in order to get his or her story written.”

Steps to being a good journalist, part 1

By VALERIA VIERA

Journalists have to keep a lot of things in mind if they want to be the best at what they do.

After reading several articles, I concluded that one of the most important things of being an outstanding journalist is to be one step ahead and always be prepare to cover a good story anywhere you go. The article that caught my attention, titled “How to Be a Good Journalist,” gives us seven simple steps to be a good journalist:

The first one would be to enjoy writing. Writing is not always easy, and journalists have to know which is the best form of language to communicate with the public. Journalists need to know structures like the “inverted pyramid” and how to apply them in a newsworthy story. Like the article states “if you don’t enjoy writing, reading, meeting new people, being under pressure, well then you’ve come to the wrong career choice, journalism is all about writing.”

Another step they say would be to carry a journal around to write about anything that pops into your head. “Most well known journalists had diaries when they were younger to practice their writing skills.” I believe writing is something that will get better by pure practice, and the more you do it the better journalist you’ll become. A journal about anything that happens in your life is the perfect practice to improve writing skills.

Step three: Carry a camera with you. Why? to illustrate your stories or articles and give the public something different to see other than paragraphs of words.

Step four would be to carry a pencil or a pen with you plus a pad at all times. A good journalist has to be prepared for unplanned breaking news that he or she wil need to cover. Even if you are not on working hours, you should always remember that the best reporter is the one that will get it all or at least some good information in good timing and with good quality.

Step five the article states it should be the willingness to meet new people. This can be the most challenging but at the same time the most interesting and fun part of being a journalist. In this career you will meet many new personalities and types of people you never knew you would encounter with. As a reporter, it is your job to learn how to obtain information from people in a fast way without breaking any rules or harming anyone.

Step six is to be honest and truthful to your audience. This means that no matter what you have to communicate that you are 100 percent sure is the true version of what happened. To accomplish this, a good journalist will support the story with evidence so that the audience can rely on it and actually believe the words written.

Last, but not least, a good journalist needs to be in touch with media at all times. Reading,watching, listening to radio, all of these activities are necessary for a reporter because he or she has to always know what is happening around the world. Also, by reading a lot new vocabulary will emerge for the journalist to use in his work: “A comprehensive vocabulary can help bring your stories and poems to life, enabling you to better describe the world around you.”

Glorifying murderers in news reports

By REBECCA COHEN

In Newton, Conn., at Sandy Hook Elementary School, 28 people lost their lives to a gunman.

Tragic; however, this is only one of the many school shootings that have occurred in recent years. It remains a mystery where or how these people develop the desire to massacre.

However, critic Roger Ebert provided some insight last year to the phenomenon.

“Events like this, if they are influenced by anything, are influenced by news programs like your own. When an unbalanced kid walks into a school and starts shooting, it becomes a major media event. Cable news drops ordinary programming and goes around the clock with it. The story is assigned a logo and a theme song; these two kids were packaged as the Trench Coat Mafia,” said Ebert.

“The message is clear to other disturbed kids around the country: If I shoot up my school, I can be famous. The TV will talk about nothing else but me. Experts will try to figure out what I was thinking. The kids and teachers at school will see they shouldn’t have messed with me. I’ll go out in a blaze of glory.”

These murderers, who would otherwise die unknown, become famous. We all know their names, hometowns and family history. We, as Americans, follow their trials diligently and go over their personalities a hundred times over.

This obsession is lead by the media. The media digs up these stories, the shooter’s history, and conducts interviews with their friends and family — thus giving the shooter what he or she originally intended. His or her voice is now heard. Their message of hate has been broadcast by our own American media.

When the Sandy Hook shooting occurred in December 2012, some media networks started to focus on the children and not the shooter. This was monumental, and is how all tragedies should be approached.

However, the media have since gone back to their old ways – most notably by putting the “Boston Bomber” Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the cover of Rolling Stone magazine. Although the magazine was boycotted by some drugstores and supermarket chains, it was still heating up newsstands.

The caption read, “The Bomber: How a popular, promising student was failed by his family, fell into radical Islam and became a monster,” framing Tsarnaev as the victim.

Why they would do this remains a mystery; however, according to reports, the controversial cover nearly doubled sales.

If the media would like to help Americans and protect them from more tragedies, it must take a different approach. By being careful not to glorify shooters, the media should focus on the victims and their families – ensuring that the shooter’s message is not heard.

Twitter hires first head of news

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

Twitter just made a big move by hiring Vivian Schiller, NBC News’ chief digital officer, as its first head of news and journalism partnerships. She also has had prior experience at CNN, The New York Times, and National Public Radio.

Schiller will be the person who connects Twitter to prominent news organizations. Twitter executives have been saying for months that they want to help media companies distribute news and now they have the right person for the job.

It is also said that she was hired due to the fact that there have been complaints about Twitter’s Board of Directors being mostly made up of white men. Her hiring adds diversity to the company.

Twitter has been hiring a number of prominent people to be heads of other departments like music and sports.

I get the feeling that this is just another step towards social media taking over journalism. A head of news and journalism partnerships at a social media company is already very different from how social media have been operating in the past, not to mention the fact that high profile people, like Schiller, are leaving their high profile jobs, like at NBC, to work there.

I also feel that this is a strategy for Twitter to be on top of all other social media sites. If Twitter is hiring people to make stronger relations with other companies, then that means it will have the support from multiple diverse organizations.

Journalism is a important part of society, and if Twitter is taking that leap to make it a prominent part of their site, then it will be more widely used by people.

School violence, media, stolen lives

By AXEL TURCIOS

In less than a week, two U.S. students are accused of murder and two teachers are dead.

Violence around the nation has spread inevitably leaving sorrow among families from both sides. The suspects’ families do not seem to understand why their kids dirty their hands with somebody’s blood. While the victims’ relatives look out for answers to help them build a clear explanation of what really occurred.

Monday, tragedy struck a middle school in Sparks, Nev. A 12-year-old boy opened fire against two other students and killing 45-year-old Michael Landsberry, a popular math teacher and member of the Nevada Air National Guard.

But the brutality does not stop there. Tuesday, two calls reporting two missing people, one a student and the other one a teacher, erupted a massive search. Wednesday morning Danvers Police Department in Massachusetts found the dead body of Colleen Ritzer, a 24-year-old math teacher. Philip Chism, a 14-year-old student remains behind bars accused of manslaughter for Ritzer’s death.

Why is there so much violence in our kids nowadays? How is it that young kids embed their minds with bloody thoughts? Does TV or other news media have an influence on them? Do video games make up a great part of the problem? Could a legislation aimed to restrict gun acquisition ease violence?

Believe as you are reading these questions to yourself, you must also be thinking that most of the answers should call a yes. But unfortunately, the solution does not depend only on us.

For instance, different gun legislation has been battled in the Senate and House of Representatives. However, legislators seem to not find a solution in which all of them agree with.

As a matter of fact, it is not just a legislation aiming for fire gun restrictions that would calm down the nation. It also depends on the parents who buy their kids brutal video games. Kids who are exposed to domestic violence at home are in danger of becoming bullies or bullied by somebody else. As you read this, many young people are still seeking for their inner entity and when they finally find it their parents would not be there.

Why? Ask yourself that question.

It’s our business, baby

By MELANIE MARTINEZ

To write or not to write … for journalists, this is something that is never pondered. It’s not even a question: journalists write, and write, and write and — you guessed it — write. They write about everything and anything and a true and noble journalist always writes the truth.

Knowing this, I was a bit shocked to learn that a reporter in Massachusetts was fired for writing a quote in his story about a young soccer star who transferred schools.

The athlete explained that she left her old school, Mount Greylock, because socially, it was like “the movie ‘Mean Girls’.” Because of that school’s cliques and drama, she transferred to McCann Technical School despite its “somewhat inferior academics and athletics”, she added.

The reporter, Isaac Avilucea, posted on his blog that the sports editor at the North Adams Transcript not only approved the story but even praised it on Twitter.

It was after Editor-in-Chief Mike Foster received calls from angry school principals and parents that he decided to fire Avilucea.

The editors then addressed the story in an editorial in which they deeply apologized for it. They explained that it was “unjust” of them to publish a story with statements that were “simply wrong”.

What I find appalling is that what is truly “unjust” here is the fact that these editors are calling a quote from a source erroneous, and even went as far as firing the reporter who wrote it.

What’s a journalist if he or she does not write the facts, supported by evidence? A well-rounded story is one that includes quotes from sources. In this case, a story about a young athlete who transferred schools obviously needs a quote from that young athlete about why she transferred.

But then I tried to reflect on the other side of this. Journalism can be seen as a career with beauty and romance, dating back to World War I times when reporters would venture to the dangerous fighting fields in various exotic locales and come back with dramatic stories.

Though this is true, journalism has also always been a business, and still is. Newspapers make money through advertisements and from the people who buy and read them. In smaller towns, it is especially important to have strong public support and continuing circulation.

Because of this, I can see why the editors the North Adams Transcript did what they did. Firing Avilucea and publishing an apology most probably mended things with those who were offended by the story, I just wish they hadn’t called the statements wrong, because they were opinions.

What could’ve nobly solved the problem and saved the angst (as well as Avilucea’s job) is if Avilucea had included comments from the schools themselves. His editors should have urged him to so that both sides could be shown and they’d have the chance to defend themselves.

This story just reminds journalists that we must always write the truth, but remember we are running the risk of losing our jobs in a career that though filled with beauty and nobleness, is also a business.

Revisiting the Manti Te’o hoax

By MATIAS WODNER

Remember when that star college football player had a long-standing internet relationship with a girl he never met?

Then that girl died and it was a huge deal that he had to deal with those circumstances, especially after his grandmother had died recently? How he used to talk with that girl on the phone when she was in the hospital? And that girl turned out to be a fake account ran by a friend of Te’o’s? Yeah, good times.

The details are long and take some time to read, but to say it’s worth it would be an understatement. It was one of the weirdest stories that I’ve ever came across and everyone else would say the same thing.

What was looked over throughout all the weirdness, though, was some of the best investigative journalism that had been seen in a while. Timothy Burke and Jack Dickey of Deadspin worked their butts off to get to the bottom of an intriguing, yet ridiculous, story about one of the nation’s most popular names.

They did the research. They made the calls. And after all was said and done, after a process that took months of investigation and years of backtracking, they did what they set out to do. They got to the bottom of it all, and they found the truth.

Though it may have resulted in Te’o looking bad and helpless, the story was needed to clear the air of mystery. Journalism doesn’t always spare everyone, nor should it. Journalism is supposed to report the truth. And that’s what Burke and Dickey did.

Now if only every other journalist could follow suit.

The state of investigative journalism

By MATIAS WODNER

Investigate journalism is an interesting and polarizing topic within the media and within society. It raises questions of ethics, while quibbling with the laws set in place by government. Though it’s a different story in different countries, the worries are similar.

In Britain, members of the news media are skeptical as to whether investigative journalism can survive. Or, worded better, whether it can succeed.

“It’s not a case of can investigative journalism survive. Of course it can,” said Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger. “Will it survive with us as a body of people depends on our editorial will, it depends on the law, it depends on having the nerve to keep on doing it because that is the path to editorial and commercial success.”

For journalists venturing into investigative journalism, the law is a big obstacle. But if the public is for this type of journalism, then journalists can be protected. In Britain, at least, the public is on their side.

A poll determined that more than half of the British public believe that investigative journalism has a positive impact, while only 12 percent believed it had a negative one.

Investigative journalism is more important than we may think or believe. It pushes boundaries that are put up for a reason. While at times it may go too far, we need that type of news for our society. Not only so that the truth can be presented, but also for our society to continue to be stimulated.

The ‘unusual’ element found in news

By DANIELA LONGO

On Oct. 10, “the most beautiful night” for Venezuelans took place in Caracas.

A group of girls showed their best looks to engage the jury and have the chance of becoming “Miss Venezuela 2013” and, therefore, represent the country internationally in 2014 in the Miss Universe competition.

After the night ended, Migbelis Castellanos was chosen as Miss Venezuela 2013.

This headline appeared in every newspaper of the country, Twitter and Instagram went crazy from the beginning of night to even a week after it happened.

Radio programs, TV shows and newscasts had the winner and the four finalists as guests.

For Venezuelans,  it seems everything else pauses on this night and they are able to escape reality for a while. This event is so powerful in this nation, that has the ability to unify a divided country.

During the “most beautiful night,” it doesn’t matter your political tendency or your social class, everyone is watching. Citizens are all happy to celebrate one more year of one of the things Venezuelans do best, beauty contests.

One of the elements of a good news story is unusualness. This element help journalists to chose whether a story is sufficiently important and interest to show the audience.

One thing is that the dog bites the man and another much different is that the man bites the dog. The first one is a normal behavior that might not deserve to be published by media because it’s a common situation, everyone already knows that a dog can bite a men. However, a man biting a dog its something rare that doesn’t happen often and society should be aware.

For journalists is necessary to find the right angle that develops that touch of uniqueness that can draw peoples attention and also gives society a valuable reason to hear the story.

The main purpose of journalism is to inform society of important things happening around the world that can affect them in some way or another. However, the way journalism functions varies from one country to another. This happens because each society, city and country is different; even each person is different and unique.

Journalism in Venezuela has become a rare thing and in the last five years has turned around completely.

This began with the nation’s political situation and censoring of freedom of expression. Venezuelan journalists in first place have to be very careful on how they communicate things without being subjective or biased by the government.

Another important fact is that with so many bad things happening every day, deaths, corruption, insecurity, bad economy, and more sad things have become the daily life, the common behavior of society. Headlines and news story are always about the same topics and normally are hard to digest.

This has caused a rare phenomenon that people have stopped watching or reading the news. They prefer to not be informed of what is happening.

I’m a Venezuelan and I can tell you how many times I have heard “change the channel or turn down the radio I don’t want to hear anything about the situation in Venezuela.”

People can’t be 100 percent uninformed. As much as a person wants to be far from bad news, the information will always come to you in some way or another.

We live in a world full of media platforms and news will get to you no matter what. Even trough the most basic form of communication, person-to-person communication.

The flip side of the Venezuelan situation is that when good things happen like the selection of the new Miss Venezuela, it becomes a rare situation and gets more attention than a political or economy story.

Normally, in journalism, a story like selection of the new Miss Venezuela might not even be published on the front page of a national newspaper or be the opening story of a newscast because it is not unusual, is something that happens every year.

The case of Venezuela shows how journalism varies depending on the needs of a society, and how something so common as electing a beauty queen every year can become an unusual news story.

Social media taking over journalism

By REBECCA FERNANDEZ

You can ask 99 percent of the people who own a cell phone if they have either Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter, or all three on their phone … and nine times out of 10, they will.

Social media have taken over our lives and they have also taken over the life of traditional journalism.

We are living in the digital information age where nearly half of all Americans get some form of local news on a mobile device and 46 percent of people get their news online at least three times a week.

What’s more, online news sources officially surpassed print newspapers in ad revenue in 2010. Thanks to online news, we’re getting more breaking news than ever before. And thanks to social media, we’re getting news as it happens — sometimes even before news organizations have a chance to report it.

Are more people turning to social media for breaking news? And can we trust the news that social media delivers to be accurate and factual? The changing face of news delivery and how social media may end up leading the charge is extremely evident and all we have to do is look at our cell phones to see it.