Re: Blog 8; It’s about a good story
Reaction to Assignment Post: Blog #8: It’s about a good story
This is a combination of a blog and a reading log.
Due: Friday, April 3.
Read “The Internet Effect on News” from The Swampland a Time Magazine blog by Michael Scherer. Take a look at some of the comments below his post that people have submitted, too. Notice that he updated his site since the first time he posted the story, making additions to his thoughts, responding to his audience, and posting some reaction to the comments he has gotten….
Add to his article with your own thoughts and by bringing in your own sources from outside the discussion. Two examples the author pointed out are especially interesting in this discussion. Feel free to use them and quote from them in your blog this week.
1. A speech about the Internet’s possible effect on reporting from 2002.
2. An article about reporting standards and the role of reporters in the digital age.
You’ve been blogging for eight weeks, and you’re all becoming really good at it. I encourage all of you to show what you can do with this post. Really put your own original thought into it, show your thoughts to some outside sources, and contribute something meaningful from your own thoughts.
Basically, you’re writing your reaction to these sources and including your original thoughts on this issue. Feel free to borrow from your past entries or your classmate’s blogs if you give them proper credit.
Good luck. This is a challenging one.
Covering two subjects. Subject 1: Cross media and fluff. Subject 2: Failure to follow through.
1. Although being able to individually select articles to be delivered to you; it may be too much of a good thing. Placing your trust in a randomly chosen feed isn’t always necessarily the best. Especially With that said;
“This means that the competition on the level of the individual story is more intense than ever before, and there is enormous pressure to distinguish yourself from the pack.”
This is where the problem comes in. Well stated by L. Rosso.
“So really, if you want to have the best story, you’ve got to make things interesting for your readers. The problem with the internet is: sometimes the stories aren’t completely true. If you think about it, the fight to win readers over is harder online when people can choose a single story to read instead an entire package. So what do they have to do? Obviously they need to find ways to hook people. This could lead to warping true stories in attempt to make them more interesting.”
I must agree. The fight to win over viewers online is harder. With a click of a button your article can be replaced. Online writers need to be more sensational. Not because it is right. Not because it is true. But because it is what hooks readers. However by doing so, they very well lose the right to call them self a journalist. The reality is, viewers below 30 really won’t care. This is not only online. As broadcast media tries to keep up with he internet it’s become a fluff-sational world.
Sadly, I even had to learn this first hand. When talking to my boyfriend on Tuesday, he had been watching the local news with his father. He blatantly stated he wasn’t paying attention because the content wasn’t specialized to him. That the local news some how didn’t apply to him. Next day, what was he watching? The news on Comedy Central. In 2004 a poll done by Pew Research Center for the People and the Press showed that 21 percent of people aged 18 to 29 cited “The Daily Show” and “Saturday Night Live” as their primary news source. (2004, Young Get News From Comedy Central) Funny is entertaining, rarely is it honest, direct or unbias. I rest better knowing he blends his news resources. As do most Americans. (Key News Audiences Now Blend Online and Traditional Sources)
2. “Once it’s on the internet, it’s there forever.” Still, the internet has a short memory. If readers don’t stay interested, a story from 24 hours ago may now be drowned out. Should there be a follow through it may not be noticed. With high competition this is likely to be the norm.
“…people want to know what their elected officials are doing. But too often we stop there; we forget that people want to know what their elected officials are doing for them. We have an obligation to follow up on the law that received so much attention upon passage and see what worked, what didn’t work and where legislators might go from here.”
People want to know about the government, international or local happening, celebrities, human interest, etc. You can cover it once, but it’s still the responsibility of journalist to follow through. Regardless of how many of the initial following still care. Many articles refer to others, but are seen independently. Either they do not link/refer to the specific article by name or author. Or readers don’t feel the need to click through a writer’s profile to find it.
“After filing a story that you think puts a big issue to rest, put a reminder in your calendar six months out. ‘Check on X.’ Did the bill/executive order/jury verdict/committee vote/election result live up to its promise? Has the desired result come to pass? Is the new system working, and if not, who is accountable?”
Following through helps to make a good story. It continues people’s personal interest, however, there is such a thing as over kill. IE: Tabloid magazines.
A few good stories and well formatted news:
Well Formatted: Endangered right whales appear to be on the rebound
Well Written: 10 Days Without News, 1, 2, 3
Two Feel Good:
Man Is Rescued by Stranger on Subway Tracks
Leap to Track. Rescue Man. Clamber Up. Catch a Train
03.Apr.09 
Assignments, Reading Log 
Comment (1)
Reading Log #2
To be honest. I love Reporters Without Borders and Doctors Without Borders. I critique them; but with love.
2008 Annual Report from Reporter Without Borders (Reporters sans frontières): The plight of journalists in 98 countries reviewed. Click to read the PDF. Make sure you put aside some time. There’s 171 pages. If you don’t want to learn about the individual countries, you can read pages 5 – 8.
Journalists have a tough time earning a living.Their defenders seem less effective than ever. It may seem odd for Reporters Without Borders to say that, but without wringing our hands (we’ve long known our strengths and weaknesses) we have to recognize that journalists are not adequately and sufficiently defended around the world.
I agree with this. Since the internet hit and ‘blogging’ or ‘journaling,’ diary writing or whatever else you wish to call it became mainstream; Journalist have been shunned. (Note the Capital on J. Yes, they are now their own endangered species.)
The issue to be brought to light is how their report is written. They are one sided and concentrated specifically on the government.
Page 5, paragraph 6.
The spinelessness of some Western countries and big international institutions is damaging freedom of expression.They are all quick to condemn developing countries that have little strategic value, but things are different when it comes to Russian President Vladimir Putin or Chinese President Hu Jintao. Western heads of state put away their lawyer’s robes and become salesmen.Trade with China and Russia is so important that human rights are rarely on the agenda. Or else they are talked about informally in very general terms. The real or false indignation of the Chinese and Russian leaders has been enough to scare even those who make the strongest protests. Who still dares to talk about the Dalai Lama or praise Taiwanese democracy to President Hu’s face? German chancellor Angela Merkel. Just her. Who can withstand the icy look of President Putin in a discussion of rights in Chechnya or about the score of journalists murdered since he came to power? The leaders of democratic countries also don’t want
Page 6, second to last paragraph.
The lack of determination by democratic countries in defending the values they supposedly stand for is alarming. The abandonment or dishonesty of those who claim to protect our freedom is even more worrying. In 2007, journalists were more than ever targets of violence (86 killed) and repression (at least two arrested each day).
Yes, it is the government of countries who determine laws. And yes, it is their job to uphold regulations. However, the government is just that. It is enforcement and regulations. It is the responsibility of the people within countries to amend and force laws to change. To call the law out and hold those in regulation accountable.
Compare 2006, 2007 and the 2008 reports. There are discrepancies which need be addressed. As was showcased in “The deceit of Reporters Without Borders/La supercherie Reporters sans frontières written by Salim Lamrani.
What has happened in Bolivia to cause this nation to fall from 16th in 2006 to 68 a year later? Where journalist killed? Where private media sources closed? Nothing of the sort. But President Evo Morales, who has launched spectacular economic and social reforms, is now in Washington’s sites. RSF, faithful to its principals, follows the lead of its sponsors and vilifies all the progressive and popular governments of Latin America.
I am in agreement with the idea of nations dropping on this list illogical, I cannot fully agree with Slim Lamrani on RWP’s/RSF’s agenda aligned with the USA.
PS- International Online Free Expression Day (IOFED) was on March 12. I hope you used it to the best of your ability.
16.Mar.09 Assignments, Reading Log Comments (4)
rcogle