Response to Chapter 5: "We Can All be Super Heroes"

I think there are some plausible points that Beckett brings up during this chapter. Journalism has begun to shift and with new technological advances, journalism needs to find different methods and outlets. Basic investigative journalism can no longer be taught and Beckett illustrates this point by stating “media literacy courses will have to teach about citizen journalist and how to work them”. The main reason for this is because due to blogging and social networks, the public is beginning to become the journalists; hence, the professionals need to know how to interact with this shift.

Ethnic diversity should play a role in journalism based on certain topics. If the journalist is reporting on hard news, then there should be no reason for diversity and biases should be excluded from the piece. On the other hand, if the article is soft news, then ethnic diversity should be illustrated within the work because; soft news usually targets certain specific groups of people. With that said, I think it would be agreeable to state that the public rather than a certain individual should collectively write certain news pieces. If there is a controversial topic, it is hard for an individual to not portray biased or “framed” opinions. Therefore, if the public interacts with one another and draws different ideas, it brings ethnic diversity and a stronger understanding to the topic.

I do not believe there is a right or wrong way to view news. People have different views and with that said, they will consistently look at news through different lenses. Some people may find news as an entertainment source, while others find it strictly informative. The goal for news is to share important information to the public and how people digest it differs from person to person.

As regards to the question about PR shifting the world of journalism and the effects it has, I believe it to be both positive and negative. Due to the shift, the only way for the world of journalism to stay afloat would be to join “the dark side of journalism”. However, it does not mean that journalism as we know it has completely disappeared, it has just altered certain aspects to adjust to the change. I do not believe that it is possible to teach fairness and transparency to citizen journalist because, the main reason a person would become a citizen journalist is if they have an opinion or certain view on a particular topic. To play off of that, “e-democracy” would be very hard to obtain because people are going to constantly have different views and challenge one another.

Transition Phase

Response

Although presenting information suggesting that journalism is going through a transition phase, Shirky does not make a prediction for what will be the replacement of print journalism in the future. In response to Kacey’s question pertaining the transition period of journalism, I agree with Shirky in the sense that now is the time for ‘experiments’. Shirky cites how innovations like Craigslist, Wikipedia, and Octavolumes were formulated through experimentation in the transformation period. By listing the beneficiaries of print journalism (politicians, district attorneys, radio hosts and bloggers) in then presenting the high expenses of printing presses, a sense of urgency is evoked among the audience. “The old stuff (printing presses) gets broken faster than the new stuff is put in its place.” If print journalism is forced to foreclose due to a lack of income before a replacement is invented than I think a chain of negative economic events will ensue, affecting politicians, radio hosts, bloggers etc (all beneficiaries of print journalism). This is why digital journalist innovators must keep experimenting until they find a solution just as a one was found in 1500 with the invention of print.

In regard to the micropayment question, I do think newspapers are doing the right thing by experimenting with ways to turn a profit online, however I don’t think micropayment will mark the end of the transition phase because instead of paying for online newspapers, people will turn to other news outlets like blogging, and word of mouth. The unthinkable scenario, which is the notion of people sharing information through the internet, has become print journalisms biggest nightmare.

In response to the third question, I think newspapers will become extinct due to the high expenses of print. The New York Times for example, is anticipating prints disappearance which is why they have invented the CustomTimes. The CustomTImes is the New York Times, but instead of paper its on your phone and television. Pending 'experimentation' with the public, things like the CustomTimes will replace newspapers.

1) If a replacement for print journalism is not found, and print presses become to expensive to keep running, than should micropayments be installed for blogging web sites so that the beneficiaries of print journalism don’t feel the effects?

2) What will surface first, prints extinction or the end of the transition period?

Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable

Clay Shirky’s article “Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable” outlines some of the major problems newspapers and journalism are facing today. Shirky outlines the history of newspapers, the recent history leading up to the internet, the present, and the future of newspapers. Throughout the article, Shirky describes ways journalists thought they would deal with the Internet, and then the “unthinkable” scenario. According to Shirky, the “unthinkable” scenario regarding newspapers and the evolution of the internet is that “The ability to share content wouldn’t shrink, it would grow.”

During the 1990’s before the explosion and widespread usage of the internet, many journalists came up with ideas on how to integrate themselves with the internet. The problem with these ideas were that none of them were taking into account the fact that the entire system may shift online, not just certain aspects. Some ideas journalists came up with to protect their industry included educating people on copyright laws, making software more coveted, paying for usage and even more harsh, suing for copyright infringers. While all of these options seemed plausible, they were missing one key option that could ensue: The Unthinkable Scenario.

The Unthinkable Scenario suggests that rules and regulations regarding the Internet aforementioned would not work, and that content sharing and usage would become the normal. This scenario virtually wipes out the entire print media industry. This unthinkable scenario appears to becoming reality.

Shirky draws a parallel between the invention of the printing press in 1500 and what is happening today to journalism. He notes that Elizabeth Eisenstein noticed that many historians ignored the actual transition from before the printing press to after the printing press was developed. She ponders, “How did we get from the world before the printing press to the world after it? What was the revolution itself like?” Shirky goes on to mention that the revolution was chaotic, and it was not a smooth transition to the printing press.

Ironically, today we face a similar revolution: the dissolution of the printing press. The biggest problem with print journalism today is the fact that printing presses are obscenely expensive and time consuming to run. While in the near future, printing press will still hold some responsibility, such as “flooding the zone-covering every angle of a huge story-to the daily grind of attending the City Council meeting, just in case.”

In relation to the expenses of the printing press, from an economic standpoint, the newspaper business is dwindling. One particular way Shirky talks about this is with his quote “ ‘Your gonna miss us when were gone!’ Has never been much of a business model.” The newspapers don’t know what to do or who exactly is covering the news currently.

According to Shirky, we are living through 1500 again, in the transition period. There are many unknowns in what is going on with newspapers, “now is the time for experiments” he states. However, while there may be ups and downs on what is going on, concern and panic shouldn’t occur because, at the end of the day only one thing matters: journalism. “Society doesn’t need newspapers. What we need is journalism.”

I think Shirky outlines important points in this article. While journalists, and society alike should be somewhat concerned because we don't know what is coming in the future, instead of worry we should experiment with this new age, and sift through what works and what doesn't work in the new media. While the result of this revolution may leave print newspapers behind, in the long-run journalism as a whole will be stronger, and society will benefit because of it.

-Check out bestselling author Seth Godin's viewpoint on the disappearance of newspapers here.

-Global perspective of the U.S. mainstream media from Russia Today on You Tube.

-Here is a brief yet concise You Tube video from freelance journalist Michael Stroud discussing the future of print newspapers.

Questions for discussion:

1.Do you think things will settle in the new media like it did after the invention and establishment of the printing press? Or, have we reached an age of technology where things will constantly be changing, and we will be in a constant transition period?

2.Do you think a micropayment system such as Itunes could eventually work successfully for online newspapers?

3. Economically speaking, do you think journalism can prosper?

Chapter 5: "We can all be Superheros"

In his final chapter, Beckett talks about the future of journalism and how the public is becoming greatly apart of the news media and the media in general. The idea of a global community is becoming less of a myth and more of a reality with the birth of the Internet and new media. One example of this is Wikipedia. Instead of following the strict rules and guidelines of an encyclopedia, information is constantly being corrected and added by individuals free of charge. Beckett writes, “the wiki principle takes advantage of software to allow a collective version of reality to be produced.” He says that both the encyclopedia, and obviously Wikipedia both make mistakes, however Wikipedia entries are constantly being corrected. Wikipedia is also another example of what Beckett describes as a blurring of lines between the journalist and the amateur. He argues that anyone can seemingly be a network journalist, or an investigative journalist if he/she has the tools. With blogs, interactive videos on Youtube, and with Internet usage on most newer cell phones, it seems as if Beckett might be on to something. He also brings up the idea of editorial diversity. This term refers to how journalists today need to focus more on catering to the audience and what they want almost as much as reporting on a story itself. When Beckett says that we have a diverse audience, he is talking about how the public has many different interests, and with the Internet we can “have multiple identities facilitated by new media and technologies.” He also argues that typically journalists today are of one particular demographic, and this is a problem because it causes certain minority groups to feel left out, or not feel as if journalism and the mainstream media are for them. Beckett believes that media colleges need to focus on attracting more of a diverse student population because, “it is in the self-interest of the news media to employ a variety of people who will connect with the various audiences.” Beckett adds on to the idea of a changing educational background in journalism by conjoining it more with business schools. The media lines have blurred because all of these tools that help us connect cater to a more informed and connected audience. Because of this, journalism is slowly becoming not much different from PR and marketing. Porter Novelli is a good example of how businesses, in this case a PR firm, have based their company’s PR techniques all using new media. Being ‘business creative’ in the journalism field is becoming a reality because with more of a diverse audience, the editor of an online publication needs to focus not only what stories to report on but also how they are laid out on a computer screen.

Questions:

Should it matter that journalists are ethnically diverse if their ultimate job is to report on news stories in a fair and unbiased way?

Beckett and Shudson have different takes on what the news should be. Beckett believes that it should be treated as a social good, whereas Schudson compares media to a form of entertainment. Do you believe there is a right or wrong way to view the news?

Are there certain news events/stories that should be written more collectively by the voice of the public than the control of the journalist? What are some examples?

Beckett talks about how journalism and business schools should be tied together as the media is changing, however he believes that journalism in the future will become more closely related to businesses such as PR and marketing. Do you think this is a positive or negative change?

Do you think it is possible to ‘teach the citizen journalist’ about fairness, transparency, and skepticism? Why or why not?

Is the idea of an “e-democracy” feasible?

Ch. 4) Fighting Evil: Terror, Community, and Networked Journalism

Charlie Beckett’s chapter Fighting Evil: Terror, Community, and Networked Journalism begins by laying out the general flow for his examination of the topics contained. His organization takes readers through terror, public security, and community cohesion. Beckett’s introduction, and his conclusion emphasize that the process of understanding terror requires more than knowledge of who the terrorists are and what motivates them. I really enjoy this direction because he humanizes journalism a bit in its exploration. Journalism is subject to the same morals as greater society. Beckett begins to establish that it is the media’s job to get the facts right, and when they fail to get the whole picture, they are failing the community they serve. Additionally, Beckett relates that terrorism has to take hold of the hearts and minds of members of the community it grows in. An attentive and well-informed media can curb the growth of extremist ideals by ensuring that reporting comes from both sides. Furthermore, by representing all of the diversity of a community in a fair, accurate, and thorough manner, journalism acts as a glue to hold communities together.

In talking about bias and ignorance, Beckett uses the example of Molly Campbell, or Misbah Rana, to make a point about how engrained opinions can condemn the accuracy of a report from the beginning. I think he is absolutely right, and that he cannot emphasize this point enough. So often in making judgments, or relating stories, people take a position without all of the facts. As Mona mentioned in her presentation, if you have a question about Islamic life, ask a Muslim. The papers failure to acknowledge the possibility that someone might choose to live in Pakistan over the UK is an example of an extreme failure to exercise the flexibility of worldview necessary to get things right in today’s media environment. Beckett also articulates rather eloquently that being an informed reporter is a big prerequisite to being a tough and responsible reporter. I love this statement because it reflects my feelings about good reporting to a T.

In talking a bit about community cohesion, Beckett pulls out his old discussion of fragmentation. That there is danger in people moving from the “daily-we” to the “daily-me” is undeniable. However, I do not think there is actually any risk in more and more specialized communities taking shape on the Internet. Information generation for a specialty depends on so much more than just the information within that particular specialty that there will always be a necessity, even for the most niche content providers, to collect information from other sources. An extremist website may condemn the content of a news report, but the mere mention of the news report drives my point home… they are consuming the other content as well. As long as the media can maintain a position of accuracy, fairness, and thoroughness on a diverse body of topics, there is no danger is the forming of niche markets that explore certain issues to their foundations. Media is already taking steps to ensure they maintain a position of accuracy by linking up with niche media organizations to get more specialized information on topics they may not have expertise in.

Beckett also raises the importance of news organizations needing to maintain a genuine interest in international affairs, and stresses the importance of maintaining a desire to understand those affairs as well. To deal with terrorism, Americans cannot just declare hatred against all terrorists and move on, the problem still exists. Additionally, the problem cannot be dealt with by military power alone. Americans need to gain an understanding of what terrorism is, why it exists, and what role the US plays in the wider world to even begin a thoughtful discussion. Just as condemnation of terrorism is not a solution for the people of the world, the media needs to recognize that reporting the mere existence of terrorists does little to help the world understand the reasons for their existence.

Beckett gives a pretty detailed treatment to the Danish cartoon happening. The Danish media was deliberately trying to be controversial, and extremists were deliberately trying to make an example out of them. The dilemma that Beckett discusses is not whether it was right to publish the cartoon in the first place, but whether or not to republish it for news about the events it sparked. This is a direct attack on freedom of expression; we don’t want to upset anyone now... In this case, I am okay with the fact that most organizations deigned to avoid the footage since it was widely available online, and the reaction the Muslim world had to the Danish cartoon could easily be foreseen; the comic was designed to be controversial after all. Beckett says, and I agree, that this respect given to the religion actually strengthens the media’s position should a situation arise when they must show something offensive. In an instance where the Islamic world is legitimately in the wrong, say one sect slaughters another because they worship idols, the media will be able to show a picture of the idol in controversy with their feet on firm, justifiable ground.

Finally, Beckett talks about misunderstanding Muslims. I boiled his points down to their simplest in this section. Muslims need to articulate themselves more, and the media needs to listen, learn, and relay. And, the media needs to stop trying to group the ungroup-able. Islam is not a line drawn in the sand; it is not even the sand itself; the diversities among Muslim populations are as numerous as the shapes of a snowflake, and as such, there is no way in hell anyone can make accurate generalizations about all of them.

In conclusion, and as I mentioned before, Beckett stresses that we need to understand more. To me there is no beginning or end to understanding… it is a life process. I do not think that I will ever reach a point where I understand enough. However, I do think it is a good start that we all strive for accuracy, fairness, and thoroughness in making decisions and reporting information. Taken to their terminal degree, I think that each of those traits could lead us to a pretty good world.

Questions to ponder:
Do you think reporters can just be reporters now?
Do scholarly explorations have any place in understanding/reporting?
Is breaking news the only kind of news and is there room/time for a more participatory/comprehensive exploration of the topics involved?
Is fragmentation a danger to public security and community cohesion?
As new media provides a voice to so many more of the world's population, should the mainstream media take the position of listener?

How Obama Won

Response to "How Obama Won" I definitely agree that the Obama campaigns’ use of social media and social networking was one of the several reasons why he was able to win the election. In response to how this election differed from others is also mainly because of what Obama’s campaign stood for. He became a symbol for change, and his slogan was ‘yes we can.’ Everything about him from his age, to his race, to his background, and being a democrat in contrast to a large number of American’s tired of Bush’s conservative ways proved to be a golden opportunity for a new candidate in every sense of the word to step in. The smartest thing that the Obama campaign could do was not only to emphasize the fact that Obama represents change, but also reach out to a majority of his younger voters who seemed to be more interested in him for these very reasons. It is the younger voters who are more likely to fluently use and understand social networking sites such as YouTube, Facebook, and Myspace, and Obama’s campaign made it easy and fun to keep up with his campaign throughout the busy political year. The article talks about how other candidates such as Clinton and McCain failed to use these sites, but I think in these scenarios, especially in McCain’s case, it probably didn’t seem as important to them to delve into new media sites because most of their supporters tended to be older, and more conservative in terms of what websites they go to. As an example, I know many of my friends’ fathers who were McCain supporters did not really understand what social networking sites are, let alone how to begin using them. In response to the first question on why Meghan McCain’s ‘bloggette’ failed to attract a large number of supporters I think was because everything about it aimed to a very specific, and fairly small demographic. Quoting from the article on the blog, “the bloggette site features a silhouette of a fetching woman in red high-heeled shoes.” This site probably wouldn’t be so appealing to someone who is not a middle- to upper class female who tends to lean republican already, and regularly wears makeup and heels to work.

draft

Response to SuperMedia Chapter 2

In response to Chapter 2 of SuperMedia and Elizabeth’s post, it was clear that the focus was on the continual evolution taking place within journalism. This chapter and the post look at the larger context of journalism and the fact is has experienced major shifts throughout history, even from the “coffeehouse to the newsroom”. Now however, the shift is to networked journalism and citizen reporting, which the chapter quotes Jeff Jarvis as saying, “The more journalists behave like citizens, the stronger their journalism will be.”

The example of this occurring currently that immediately came to mind for me was the recently unveiled HuffPost College, connected to The Huffington Post, a blog that we frequently discuss and examine in class. HuffPost College will be, as Ariana Huffington writes in a blog posted yesterday: “HuffPost College features voices from colleges and universities all around the country and offers a real-time snapshot of what's going on in the lives of the nation's 19 million college students -- from coverage of the latest trends and sports happenings to more serious issues such as freedom of expression on campus and the rising cost of tuition.”

The innovative blog was launched with an article featuring different faces and signs of college kids that are in debt. This is an incredible example of the moving forward capabilities of journalism discussed in Elizabeth’s post and Chapter 2. This post integrates a look at various college students in debt, as well as the ability to post your own personal story of debt in college. This kind of citizen journalism is an example of how networked journalism is different from the past. Ariana recognizes that there are a myriad of college newspapers across the country, and on this section of the Huffington Post will bridge the gap between kids and what they are commonly experiencing on their campuses.

Lastly, the post and the chapter mention the issue of trust, and I believe HuffPost College has the potential to build up trust again in the area of college journalism. This trust comes from the constant refinement of news and shining light on issues where there is not just one source in control on the issues. HuffPost College will be an incredible avenue for college students to come together across the country on common issues, discussion, and journalism.