Tag Archives: Journalism

Pilot’s announcement causes panic

Posted on by
Reply

By AXEL TURCIOS

Last week, passengers from Southwest Airlines flight 3426 lived their worst nightmare when they heard the captain saying the plane was going down.

According to passenger Shelley Willis, who spoke to CNN,  the announcement at first sounded like a joke, but then it was terror that took over.

“He said, ‘We’re going down.’ And everyone is looking around like, ‘is this a joke? Is he serious?’ And then you felt the nosedive.” Willis was saying.

Based on later reports, the captain had apparently been working on a plan with flight attendants after getting an alert prompting irregular cabin pressure. While doing so, he accidentally activated the PA system letting everyone on board hear those horrifying words.

The Boeing 737 aircraft, took off from Tampa to Raleigh Durham International Airport in North Carolina.

Willis, who is a nurse, said that the frightening drop that occurred at about 100 miles from the airport, gave a panic attack to the first-time flyer seated next to her.

Could this have really made an impact on the passengers’ lives?

Many news media outlets were saying that many of the flyers were complaining about the way the captain handled the incident. Others were speculating about possible future lawsuits demanding compensation after the “uneasy feelings” experienced.

At the end, the aircraft was leveled out and landed safely at the original destination.

Southwest Airlines said in a statement; “flight 3426 experienced a ‘maintenance alert’ that was resolved at 25,000 feet.”

As of now, questions are still to be answered, but the fact is that things like these may scare the heck out of anyone. Probing that flying is not for everyone because when you step inside a plane you are not 100 percent sure you’ll step out.

Think about it next time you decide to board a flight to London. Why? Flying from Miami takes almost nine hours to cross the Atlantic Ocean to reach the European continent.

For those passengers who experienced terror aboard flight 3426, might take a little bit more than nine hours to actually step inside an aircraft once again.

Becoming a sports journalist, part 1

Posted on by
Reply

By VALERIA VIERA

Journalists have many different beats and specializations from which to choose from when it comes to choosing a career path — entertainment, sports, music, economy, politics, international and so forth.

Sports journalism is  an area that can take time to learn how to write it so it is fun, simple, and explicit to the audience.

The article “How to Become a Sports Journalist” edited by Donald Pillai and others teaches us the important steps to becoming a successful sports journalist in today’s society.

According to the article, first you have to be “passionate about sports.” This step is quite obvious, since there must be a sense of excitement coming from the journalist so he or she can transmit it to the people reading whatever the journalist writes about. The person has to like what they are writing about, that way they actually know what they are saying. Also, sports history is important to know and be informed of.

Next is also a step that everyone should know: reading about sports article. The only way you can really learn is by reading the work of others. That way the journalist can critique his own work and maybe add a different structure to it so it is easier, cleaner, and more entertaining to read.

“Familiarize yourself with the way a sports journalist writes. Study your favorite sports journalists to see why they might have become so successful,” Pillai wrote.

This last sentence is a good advice since if you want to be the best at what you do, do not  imitate that person you look up to, but unite those things about he or she you like with your own. Combine them and the best piece of work will come out.

Step three: Just write. Writing about sports is just one branch of writing you have to be a good writer, one that can write about anything not just sports.

Step four: “Get an education” This refers to completing high school, focusing on getting good results from your writing classes. According to the article:

“You will need a Bachelor’s degree to pursue a career in sports journalist. Go to a four-year college and major in English, with a concentration in Journalism. Consider getting graduate degree. This will make you more desirable to potential employers. Note that it may be easier to work on your graduate degree once you have gotten your first job.”

Step five is one that most students right now in college should most likely want to pay attention to: join your University’s newspaper. Not only for the curriculum and resumé, but also so you can prepare yourself for the real world. Doing internships, volunteering, and putting your work out there in websites and in your university’s newspaper are all necessary steps you have to take before having a real job. Why? Because just a degree or a title is not enough for the majority of the people who will hire you. They have to know you are not only well-experienced at the job you are applying for, but also good at it. Becoming your University’s sports journalist will help you in many ways.

If you are still in high school, joining it’s newspaper is also a perfect beginning for a successful career in the future.

Becoming a sports journalist, part 2

Posted on by
Reply

By VALERIA VIERA

In this other half of this pair of posts, we continue with the steps to becoming a successful sports journalist!

Step six, according to the article “How to Become a Sports Journalist,” refers to becoming an intern, as I previously mentioned. Applying for internships and working at several different stations will give you good experience for your future. It will show you what it will be like in the real world, and it will give you the opportunity for you to decide what it is you are good for and what not. What you really like and what you don’t. Maybe by doing the internship you realize that sports writing is not what you want to do in life, or maybe you realize it is the perfect job for you.

Next you want to apply for an “entry-level job.If you interned at a specific newspaper, apply there first because they will be more likely to hire an intern they’ve worked with than someone outside the company.”

This is completely true, but it is not always this way so do not get too attached to the idea. The process to finding your ideal job can take time, so do not get frustrated.

Step eight, according to the article, would be to consider freelancing. “If you’re having difficulty finding a full-time, regular job, try your hand at freelance writing. Send queries to sports magazines and newspapers about which you know.

If they like your query, they will hire you to write the article, and if they like your article, they may hire you on a contract basis or even full time.” Freelancing is a start to make good connections and to let others read your work. It might get you a job you did not even dream of getting. Is a matter of right timing and good writing.

Also I believe that if you are having trouble or do not find exactly what you are looking for, consider teaching. Once you are good at sports writing, teaching can always be something you can do to help others, to gain some money, and for yourself as a way to keep gaining more experience.

Last but not least, earning a bachelor of arts degree in journalism or communication with courses in “mass media, advanced writing, news reporting, public speaking and political communications,” is the final step to becoming a sports journalist.

This article shows us the basic steps to becoming a sports journalists, but we should also keep in mind values that will help make it through these steps: honesty, respect, love for what you do, and humility.

Batkid makes national headlines

Posted on by
Reply

By AXEL TURCIOS

This week the Make a Wish Foundation went further and beyond to fulfill a five-year-old boy’s dream of saving the world right next to Batman.

Miles Scott is a recovering leukemia patient who asked the charity for a memorable day assisting his favorite super hero.

Friday, the city of San Francisco, transformed into Gotham City, received the most evil villains ever imagined. But there was Batman and his Batkid ready to take action on the Batmobile.

More than 11,000  people came not only from California, but also from other states to show support to the little super hero.

The city was hit by a wave of crime all at once, requiring Batman’s and his assistant’s help. With the help of the “big guy,” Batman, Miles was able to save the day.

For the first time, since its more than 30 years of history, Make a Wish organizers say they didn’t have to request volunteers. They would come and sign up to be part of this amazing adventure in big amounts.

Even a San Francisco newspaper published a special edition announcing the big event that captured the eyes and hearts of millions.

Saving a woman taken as a hostage, tied up to cable tracks and a “bomb” and imprisoning the evil Riddler who attempted to rob a bank, were among the victories that only Batkid could achieve.

In fact, super heroes do get hungry, so they had to make a short stop to have some lunch and recharge the batteries.

But it doesn’t stop there. The legendary Penguin horrified everyone when he abducted Lou Seal, the Giants’ baseball team mascot.

This indeed mobilized the whole city in a battle between the good and evil.

Batkid! Batkid! Batkid! Screamed the enthusiastic crowd that was thirsty to see more from Miles.

As everyone was expecting, doing stunts, tricks and using intelligence, both Batman and Batkid saved Lou Seal from the Penguin’s clutches.

The five-year-old hero was diagnosed with cancer three years ago, underwent chemotherapy treatment and is now in remission.

For a moment, everyone who witnessed Miles’s victories forgot about the tragic side of the story. In fact, for many it meant hope that good things can happen during a tragically episode in life.

My question is why is it that our nation doesn’t get involved more often to promote peaceful events like this one? Why is it that violence is what conquers our hearts rather than good actions?

The answers to these questions are hard to find because we live in a nation were guns are so common and death so frequent we have become insensitive to it.

As a news media journalist, I just don’t see this story as a happy one. I see it as a heart-touching one and it has taught us all that dreams are never impossible.

Has journalism fallen?

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

The value of celebrities in news

Posted on by
Reply

By MELISSA MALLIN

I often wonder why so many people obsess over celebrities and why famous people generate such high value in today’s news cycles.

I understand why entertainment magazines value celebrities and their gossip as news worthy. It is entertainment and that’s what the magazine is all about — the entertainment industry.

But it seems absurd, (at least to me) that CNN, Fox News, and so many other worldwide news organizations take the time to inform viewers about the lives of celebrities or, at least, contribute to the gossip about them.

So how did entertainment news and gossip become world-wide valued hard-news stories? And why are people more interested in the lives of celebrities than what’s actually going on in the world?

Celebrities represent people who are much prettier, better dressed and much wealthier than the average person. From a young age, we are predisposed to celebrities by watching TV shows and listening to music. We develop an appreciation for these artists and we become obsessed with our favorite people. Because we love our favorite actors or musicians we become eager to learn more about them and what goes on in their lives and less about our own. We focus more on when the next Britney Spears album comes out and less on doing homework and which college we’d eventually like to attend.

When we develop an interest for the characters we watch, and the actors that play them, we become obsessed and want to know everything there is to know about them. Entertainment news and gossip provide insight into the lives of everyone’s favorite celebrities. Many people consider celebrities to be their friends and, thus, want to know more about them. They show that celebrities, too, are normal people just like us who also experience heartache, destruction, and disaster.

The rise of the Internet, the invention of television and radio, as well as a slight decrease in education have all contributed to the role celebrities play in our mainstream news.

Regular news is often boring, negative, depressing and often hard to follow. Most people don’t take the time to follow or keep up with the news because it makes them feel bad. Celebrity news is entertaining, comical, relaxing and makes people feel good knowing that celebrities go through tough times just like we do. Celebrity news gives people a chance to break away from their own lives and into the lives of someone else.

But while entertainment news is interesting and provides a relief from our own everyday lives, when put into perspective, all celebrity gossip and entertainment news has done is dumb our society down by making Miley Cyrus more important and newsworthy than Congress or the president.

It seems outrageous that our news feeds would be filled with news of Kim Kardashian’s due date and Kate Middleton’s baby name than on our continued involvement in the Middle East or the ever-increasing interest rates of college loans and growing student debt.

In the long run, both beauty and fame fade (and it happens fast). By focusing and including celebrity gossip in our mainstream news, we are sending a message to younger generations that nothing matters as long as they’re famous and pretty.

But, as many of us know (at least I hope many of us know). life is not defined by how beautiful or famous we are, it is defined by the impact we make on society and the love we spread.

Being smart and intelligent is much more valuable than being famous and/or beautiful. Beauty and fame are easily disposable. Cultural significance and positive change last longer and are much more respected.

With this, I propose a change in celebrity gossip and the value they hold in our news. If the news reported on how political policy affected those in the social elite rather than just their physical appearance and wardrobe, then their coverage would be legitimately solidified. We live in a society that holds physical appearance as the only important value; if we are not beautiful or skinny, then we are not important. We need to re-evaluate and re-focus news on the things that matter — such as education.

Sure, the news holds negative and depressing stories, but that’s because our world is filled with such things. We are only hurting ourselves and our value of intelligence by dumbing ourselves down and distracting ourselves with the lives of celebrities instead of trying to improve our own.

For more please visit http://askville.amazon.com/people-interested-lives-celebrities/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=4760919 http://www.centralfloridafuture.com/opinion/coverage-of-celebrities-should-not-overpower-newsworthy-reporting-1.2830619#.Un6kHhaRTCEt

Conspiracy theories and the media

Posted on by
Reply

By MELISSA MALLIN

Recently, conspiracy theories have become very popular.

A conspiracy theory can be thought of as the belief that authorities and government officials are responsible for some type of (destructive) unexplained event and that the official explanation or story cannot be trusted. Often, those who believe in one conspiracy tend to believe in others.

Those who believe in conspiracy theories are often characterized as irrational, unbelievable, and/or all around nuts. An intelligent, very well-liked person with credibility can quickly and easily become irrational, disliked, and lose their credibility just by being labeled a conspirator in mainstream media.

The easiest way for officials and the media to brush something off is by labeling it a conspiracy theory. When conspiracy theories do arise, officials and media outlets are extremely quick to dismiss certain types of views, point fingers, and label anyone who believes in this “outrageous idea” a conspiracy theorist.

Back in the day, the mainstream media served as a watchdog for government, exposing and uncovering hidden secrets (Think Nixon and the Watergate scandal). To many people today, it appears though, that the mainstream media only tell us what the government and big corporations want us to hear. Most people consider the media to be the biggest conspiracy of all, lying to society about what’s really going on overseas and/or in our own backyard.

So if we can’t trust our very own news media for answers or to further investigate questionable scandals then who can we trust? Many people turn to conspiracy theories for answers because it appears that those conspiracies provide answers to many of the questions the mainstream media often avoids.

Many conspiracy theories hold some value of truth but more often then not they hold an extremist viewpoint and can be considered false. But what happens when these conspiracy theories turn out to be true? As we know, the media tends to get a lot of things wrong and blur questionable facts. When the mainstream media labels something a conspiracy theory and then later, it turns out to be true, does this further discredit our very own media and give more credibility to conspiracy theories? Let’s take a look.

Remember Fukushima, the nuclear power plant that erupted in Japan? Back when it happened, the mainstream media coverage insisted that the nuclear radiation was nothing like Chernobyl and that many residents could soon return to their homes. Overall, the media declared Fukushima ‘no big deal.’ Many “conspiracy theorists” called this one — declaring Fukushima uninhabitable due to nuclear radiation. As it turns out, a few months later The New York Times released an article in which “broad areas around the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant could soon be declared uninhabitable, perhaps for decades ….”

How about the U.S military attacks on Libya? At the beginning, those who saw this coming and spoke up about it were called kooks and whack-jobs. (The majority of Americans never saw this coming) Even recently, the mainstream media still denies that NATO is currently arming and training Libyan rebels. In order to be less responsible for the bloodshed and still achieve their goals, the U.S and EU have developed, trained, and equipped “rebel groups” within the country and have used them as the ground forces for this campaign. The New York Times admits ” the learning curve for the rebels, with training and equipping, was increasing. What we’ve seen in the last few weeks is these two curves have crossed.” Now, many prominent officials are already calling for the U.S and EU to provide occupational forces.

How about the popular conspiracy that the increasing amounts of fluoride in our water is actually bad for us? For the first time in 50 years, the feds have just now reduced the “recommended amount” of fluoride in our drinking water. A CNN article reported that the federal government is now saying that high levels of fluoride in the water have now officially been linked with fluorosis-a condition that causes spotting and streaking on teeth.

How about the idea that cell phone use can cause cancer? Startling scientific research has now found a connection between the two. A recent CNN article states, “At the highest exposure level — using a mobile phone half an hour a day over a 10-year period — the study found a 40 percent increased risk of glioma brain tumors.”

This last example involves the conspiracy that the U.S government provides weapons for Mexican drug cartels. This idea has been around for a long time, yet nobody has taken the time to listen to or investigate the theory. Now, it is a matter of public record. The government has, indeed, facilitated the transfer of thousands of guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

A CBS News report discusses the opposition that many ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) agents admitted to allowing thousands of guns to be given into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. “One Project Gunrunner source told us just how many guns flooded the black market under ATF’s watchful eye …. For months, ATF agents followed 50-caliber Barrett rifles and other guns believed headed for the Mexican border, but were ordered to let them go.”

It’s hard to determine whether these are just common mainstream media mistakes or if the media actually hides the truth for as long as they can until the government (or unavoidable research and explanation) allows them to admit such truths.

The mainstream news media never hesitates to label an absurd theory as a conspiracy-and those who believe in it-as conspirators. The label alone is enough to discredit anyone-no matter how smart, intelligent and credible they really are. But these examples have shown that conspiracy theorists have often times been correct, even if the media has not admitted or accepted these theories right away.

So does this mean we should discredit the mainstream media and credit conspiracy theories instead?

Not necessarily.

All I’m suggesting is that the mainstream news media seem to be quick in labeling theories that discredit the government as conspiracies. By doing this, the majority of people discredit these theories and sometimes these theories turn out to be true. Of course, not all conspiracy theories are true and, quite often, most of them are absurd. But the fact remains, that there seems to be some layer of truth in conspiracies that arise and instead of discrediting them because the mainstream media has told us too, we should further investigate and come up with our own conclusions.

As these examples have shown, when the media is quick to disbelieve and discredit someone as a conspiracy/conspirator, it is in our best interest that we do our own investigating for the truth.

For more on conspiracy theories and the media please visit http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/14-conspiracy-theories-that-the-media-now-admits-are-conspiracy-facts

War zones dangerous for journalists

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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?

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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.