Sorry this is posted so late, had a computer emergency.. :( http://i.imgur.com/S5FHaVy.jpg
turns out that thinkpads are tough, but not enough to survive the 6' fall from a bed
Walter Lippmann, a cofounder of a magazine in the 1920s, worried about the reach of the media's gatekeeping effect. America's strong capitalism was being challenged by the rise of Bolshevism in Russia. Lippmann attributed this largely to the gatekeeping actions of each country's media. The citizen's were told what issues were important and what they should be informed about. Contrasting this, Kovach and Rosenstiel say that we now "consume news now by topic and by story, and less by relying on the judgment of news institutions to select [these topics] for us." But, although we choose what we learn about, many Americans repeatedly get the same biased side of each issue. In an age of technology where we have abundant sources for contrasting opinions on each issue, why do many people refuse to compile information from multiple sources? Is the media gatekeeping effect still powerful and relevant, or are people just lazy?
As seen in the past two presidential elections, a lot of information that we receive does not still come from the main media sources. President Obama's Youtube channel was viewed more than a billion times during the 2008 election. So, Kovach and Rosenstiel call for the "next journalism." Previously, consumers didn't really have a choice but to listen to the press. But, now, we have options, so the press must "serve the more active citizen." Do you think that the increased competition against traditional media will in turn make it more reliable and honest?
The authors talk about the increasing importance of editors. Although information is widely available on the internet, it often doesn't go through the same editing and refinement processes that newspapers or other traditional media do. This level of quality takes money, though. If the delivery method for these quality news sources was the internet instead of the traditional newspapers, would they fail if the service wasn't free? Why are people accepting of paying for quality information on television and in print, but are reluctant to do so when it is available on the internet?
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
In the article “Journalism ethics amid structural change”, author Jane B. Singer discusses the evolution of journalism with the new digital age and the development of the Internet as a means to relay information. Economic structure, organizational structure, narrative structure, and relationship structure each have their own ethical implications in this development. With Singer’s lengthy credentials, it is evident that she is a credible source and therefore the article as well.
Singer began at the University of Georgia, with a bachelor’s degree in journalism. She then went on to earn her doctorate degree from the University of Missouri-Columbia. Singer is currently an Associate Professor at the University of Iowa in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication. She teaches courses focusing on digital journalism, editing, ethics and political coverage. With the focus of the article being on digital journalism and ethics in journalism, it is evident that since she teaches courses in these subjects she is very knowledgeable about the topics. She is also a Visiting Professor at the University of Central Lancashire in the United Kingdom. Along with her academic credentials, she has also contributed to many worthy publications. These include working as a coauthor for Online Journalism Ethics: Traditions and Transitions, editor for Media Ethics magazine, and being a member on the editorial board for seven scholarly journals. In addition, she just completed a term as the national president of the journalism honor society, Kappa Tau Alpha. Singer has won many awards, such as the Clifford G. Christians Ethics Research Award in 2007, proving that she is highly regarded among her peers.
The article was published in Daedalus, which publishes works by prominent figures in the arts, science, and humanities. Members of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences form Daedalus. Since this is such an acclaimed source for such a variety of topics, this article gains even greater credibility. To be published in an editorial like Daedalus, the article must go through a process where both the author and the ideas presented are reliable and worthy of being produced by such an esteemed source. This, once again, makes the article a trustworthy source.
After researching criticism I was unable to find any negative comments regarding the article. With no negative criticism, it is likely that there are no serious issues regarding Singer’s claims in the article. If there were questions about any of her assertions there would most likely be comments. Without any negative criticism, it makes the article more trustworthy since there have been no problems found, if there are any.
In conclusion, the combination of a credible author and publisher prove that while reading “Journalism ethics amid structural change”, we can be confident in trusting the ideas presented in the article. From the credible author to the highly esteemed publisher, this article is reliable for it’s facts and opinions.
Tuesday, March 19, 2013
Journalism Ethics amid Structural Change Speech
1. Introduction: Journalism is undergoing a ethnical change
a. Thesis: Journalism is undergoing a change which is causing it to decide to change or retain its ethics because of four different changes of the Journalistic Structure: Economic, Organizational, Narrative, and Relationship.
a. Economic Changes
i. The Great Recession Caused Many Readers and Advertisers to leave
ii. The Internet is Cheaper to Advertise and Easier for Readers to Access
b. Organizational Changes
i. Convergence of Fast Internet News and Printed, with Less Journalists
c. Narrative Changes
i. Internet stories never end
ii. Journalist Blogs reveal Journalists with Opinions
d. Relationship Changes
i. Audience and Journalists are Closer than Ever
3. Singer’s Conclusion
a. Journalists need to commit to the truth, but adapt to the changing structure
b. Journalism needs to stay with audience to keep social power to maintain integrity and keep those in power in check
4. My Thoughts: Journalism must continue to be relevant and necessary for a Democracy, but the way to that with the changes is more unclear
a. Need to find the perfect balance of truth and objectivity, while still keeping financially sound
b. There will be bias, as discussed in lecture, but to strive for the unbiased nature is key
c. We have to allow the media to find the balance without ourselves influencing it, nor the Big businesses
5. Conclusion: A change is coming for Journalism because of the changes brought by the economy and internet, but Journalism will stay true to its calling of truthful reporting if we allow it to.
1. Chapters 8&9 in Blur: How to know what’s true in the age of information over load.
a. Chapter 8
i. Decide what’s important, how much time to spend on it, and how we should react
ii. The most reliable news has a method which usually includes some of these steps:
1. Know the history so you can understand the context and other underlying issues
2. Identify the goals of the group
3. Investigate wither the group meets their goals
4. Question members about current situation
5. Tell in understandable way
6. Use an emotional appeal
b. Chapter 9
i. More than gatekeepers:
1. Verify info
2. Put into context
3. Search for social wrong doing
4. Make things known to public
5. Help those with a small voice
6. Sort important and non-important
7. Create places for an open discussion
8. Show path to amateur writers
ii. New Newsroom
1. Must reaffirm proof
2. Be transparent
3. Specialize in a certain area or find a specialist
4. Develop new skills (more tech savvy)
5. Utilize editors
6. Change definition of what news is
d. Agree but would add
Posted by Jonah Bastin at 10:55 AM
Monday, March 18, 2013
Jane Singer mentions how “hit logs” on news web pages make it easier for news organizations to see what stories garner interest. Should these “hit logs” drive content, given that the public is expressing what kind of stories it wants to see?
-Do news organizations even have the option to ignore the hit logs, considering that page views are vital in gaining online revenue?
Singer calls the online form of journalism “likely to be inferior to the care taken with the legacy (print) one.” Considering that most of us receive the majority of our news from online outlets, is this concerning that we are receiving “inferior” news.
Singer claims that “the journalist no longer is alone in carrying out the process of determining what is true and meaningful,” giving some of the responsibility to the online audience. When reading an online article, do you pay any attention to the comments or the links provided within the story?
-Is the journalist’s role increased or diminished with the emergence of this online forum?
Although I haven’t seen any of these movies in particular, I agree with the statement that filmmakers should be held responsible for telling the truth. At the same time, movies are considered a pure form of entertainment so it should be a given that not everything is true nor does it have to be. The viewers should be able to decide whether they believe it or not. It is somewhat their responsibility to not be completely ignorant of what is being shown. This statement goes against my initial sentence saying that filmmakers should be held responsible for the truth, but I think that they should only have to be responsible for telling the truth under certain circumstances.
If a movie is depicting a specific historical event they should be telling the truth. Whenever a movie is basing their story line on past events, people, and stories they should be 100% factual. If they aren’t accurate, then, the movie shouldn’t use the same names for the subjects. They should then give alternative names and let the audience decide whether or not it relates to what they were initially trying to depict.
With the movies in the article, the responses given weren’t out of line by any means. These movies all represented mass historical events. Also, they made it clear which event was being depicted. Therefore some things should have been changed so there was no misrepresentation going on throughout the films. They could’ve changed names like I suggested above or they could have even made a small disclaimer before or after the movie. At least this way it would be clear that these historically based movies aren’t 100% accurate. They don’t necessarily have to state everything that isn’t true. They could just mention that they aren’t fully based off of the historical event. This way the filmmaker would be informing their audience that the movie isn’t meant to accurately depict the historical event 100% of the film.