This blog by Alex Cox has a very well thought out organization system in its writing. It explains the lectures in great detail first and then it goes into what she got from it. I enjoyed reading her seven yardsticks and nine principles lecture review because it was well written and well thought through. It listed the principles and yardsticks as well as their definition and importance. She then went onto what she learned from this lecture and how this will help her in the future. The only thing I was a little disappointed about was her media critique. The first thing I noticed was it's length and really when looking at a piece of writing one should not base it off it's length. Though when I read it through it had the makings of a media critique, but it lacked more content. There was only one reason, that she gave, that really made it not relative to the USA times section. I will give her the fact that local relevance was the key part of this article that made it stand out. Besides that it was put together nicely and all her other content is very informative and helped deepen my knowledge of some topics. I would recommend reading her lecture posts because they are really helpful if you need to know the subject better.
Alex's blog
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Media Critique- Palin Family present at party where fight broke out/WLKY
WLKY is a local Louisville weather channel known for big stories and weather applying to Louisville and other parts of Kentucky. Though ,while looking at the Politics column, there happened to be a very small story. The title was the first thing that seemed off, Palin family at party where fight broke out. This is not the title of a political story, this is the title of a celebrity profile. Another thing that was odd was the fact that this was not a well known event. This article violated many things including making the important interesting ,from the nine principles of journalism, as well as newsworthiness, explanation, context from the seven yardsticks.
This author violated making the important interesting by flipping it and trying to make the interesting important. There is a difference between being a watchdog and just posting celebrity updates. This story held no information about the Palin family's past in the government, nor their future. The title itself, Palin family at party where fight broke out, was like looking at the cover of some kind of celebrity gossip magazine. This author clearly tried to make the interesting important, but failed to realize that the people may think that it's an interesting story, but this is not a political story. Yes, it may have some past politicians involved, but this is all about their personal life.
Newsworthiness is based on to types of topics, core and peripheral. They mean two completely different things. Core are main topics, ones that are highly important and peripheral topics are ones that maybe interesting, but not as important. This article is a peripheral topic under the category human interests and Celebrities. It is understandable that they would put this under the Politics section, but really it is just a celebrity update and the celebrity family happens to have a past in the government. This does not make it newsworthy though. This is not a story that will last past the week it came out, nor will it have a large effect on 312 million people in this country.
Big picture reporting really gives itself away in the fact that it is reporting about big issues in society and it's effects rather then a small event. This "issue" was not a big explosion that effected a massive audience. It was a small fight that was outside of the party between Sarah Palin's son and his sister's ex boyfriend. There was no need to have this as a big political story on WLKY. They could have tried and looked at how this event changed the neighborhood. That would have slightly made up for the episodic reporting that they did, as well as putting it in a smaller column would have really changed how people saw this article. This is episodic reporting and it has no place in the political section of a well known station.
Sources happen to be a big part of journalism that can make or break your story. This story did have sources, exactly two that pertained to the story. One was a vague response from police and a random Alaskan blogger. There was also a quote from Sarah's Facebook that WLKY thought was an excuse that she had "plenty of time to fly home and attend Saturday night's shindig". The sources in this article are very shady and leave the reader slightly in the dark about the legitimacy of this event. To make up for the lack of sources they should have gotten a better statement from the police, or some statements from the surrounding neighbors about what they saw. Articles should have multiple, solid sources and this one didn't which really disappointed me.
This article was off on many things like making the interesting important, newsworthiness, explanation and context. It really disappointed me that a big channel like WLKY would have such a small issue in a large category as well as the lack of sources in it. They could have made a lot of things better in this article and with a few tweaks this could be a interesting celebrity update in a more social category or somewhere that is not so big.
WLKY's article
This author violated making the important interesting by flipping it and trying to make the interesting important. There is a difference between being a watchdog and just posting celebrity updates. This story held no information about the Palin family's past in the government, nor their future. The title itself, Palin family at party where fight broke out, was like looking at the cover of some kind of celebrity gossip magazine. This author clearly tried to make the interesting important, but failed to realize that the people may think that it's an interesting story, but this is not a political story. Yes, it may have some past politicians involved, but this is all about their personal life.
Newsworthiness is based on to types of topics, core and peripheral. They mean two completely different things. Core are main topics, ones that are highly important and peripheral topics are ones that maybe interesting, but not as important. This article is a peripheral topic under the category human interests and Celebrities. It is understandable that they would put this under the Politics section, but really it is just a celebrity update and the celebrity family happens to have a past in the government. This does not make it newsworthy though. This is not a story that will last past the week it came out, nor will it have a large effect on 312 million people in this country.
Big picture reporting really gives itself away in the fact that it is reporting about big issues in society and it's effects rather then a small event. This "issue" was not a big explosion that effected a massive audience. It was a small fight that was outside of the party between Sarah Palin's son and his sister's ex boyfriend. There was no need to have this as a big political story on WLKY. They could have tried and looked at how this event changed the neighborhood. That would have slightly made up for the episodic reporting that they did, as well as putting it in a smaller column would have really changed how people saw this article. This is episodic reporting and it has no place in the political section of a well known station.
Sources happen to be a big part of journalism that can make or break your story. This story did have sources, exactly two that pertained to the story. One was a vague response from police and a random Alaskan blogger. There was also a quote from Sarah's Facebook that WLKY thought was an excuse that she had "plenty of time to fly home and attend Saturday night's shindig". The sources in this article are very shady and leave the reader slightly in the dark about the legitimacy of this event. To make up for the lack of sources they should have gotten a better statement from the police, or some statements from the surrounding neighbors about what they saw. Articles should have multiple, solid sources and this one didn't which really disappointed me.
This article was off on many things like making the interesting important, newsworthiness, explanation and context. It really disappointed me that a big channel like WLKY would have such a small issue in a large category as well as the lack of sources in it. They could have made a lot of things better in this article and with a few tweaks this could be a interesting celebrity update in a more social category or somewhere that is not so big.
WLKY's article
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
The first mass communication-lecture
Journalism was not born into this world, but it was brought into focus around 5,500 years ago. It all started in Mesopotamia where stamp seals became the first written/non-verbal communication. This stamp was used in many ways such as kings verifying laws, merchants counting cargo and the verification of paying taxes. This helped people begin to keep records of the things that happened. Now about 3,500-3,600 years later in 0-99 B.C the Romans came up with a way to crank out documents faster then by hand. They invented the screw press which revolutionized the efficiency of trading and just general life. Now about 200-300 years after the screw press the chinese/ the egyptians built their own efficient press made of wood blocks. These blocks had all the words on them to spell out the documents they wanted to write, and all they needed to do was put them in ink and stamp them. The only issue was that wood roots, breaks and will not last. So in about the 10th century the chinese came up with another press that moved far faster than their previous one. This one had movable letters, which made it easier to change the words and type what ever they wanted. Though it was still wood, which became a problem because the more they printed the faster it broke. So finally in about 1450 B.C Gutenberg came up with the metal printing press, which still had the same key movable letters feature. Though it was made of metal which lasted quite a while longer then the wood presses did. Gutenberg's invention had many impacts including increase in literacy rates, the Protestant reformation, the spreading of news, The Renaissance and finally The Enlightening period. This revolutionized journalism and it all started from stamp seals about 5,500 years ago.
The 5 steps of Mass Communications- lecture
There are many situations where the five steps come into play. For example when you read a book there are many steps before you even read it. First there is stimulus, then encoding, transmission, decoding and finally internalization. Stimulus is when, in the case of a book, the author come up with the idea for the plot in their brain. Then it goes to encoding, which is where the author puts the idea to paper or computer any place outside of their head. Transmission is the next step in the mass communication process. This is where the author gets his/her book published from the encoding stage, so that others can read it. The second to last step is decoding, and this is where someone else reads the author's published idea that is in the form of a book. The last step is internalization and it is the step after decoding where the author's idea is now taken in and understood in that person's brain. These are the steps that must be taken when an idea is made so that a large group will be able to see it.
There are also the impediments during the encoding, transmission and decoding processes that could stop the idea from being internalized by all people. One of the impediments is environmental noise, it effects the decoding process. This can be any noise from outside or inside the environment the person is in that keeps them from seeing your idea. A couple of examples would be a drill going off while watching a movie, or your book left out in the rain. Another is semantic noise which is something that prevents you from being able to encode the idea. Like your computer dying while your typing or losing the notebook with your idea in it. The last one is channel noise and this effects the transmission stage this maybe something like having problems editing or being unable to publish or find a publisher. These are problems, in the early stages, that could stop the idea from becoming known to a mass audience.
In the last stage of mass communication there are filters that can prevent people from seeing your idea and understanding it. In the internalization stage there are three filters physical, psychological and informational. The physical filter is a actual problem in a person's body that prevents them from internalizing the data. For example a blind person could not see a movie, nor could a deaf person hear a talk show. This filter can be proven wrong some times like a blind person can read a book as long as it is in braille. Also, a deaf person can still see a movie and understand most of it, especially if they can read lips. The next filter is a psychological filter, which is not a physical but mental problem that keeps someone from internalizing an idea. An example would be if a very strong voiced environment protector tried to internalize a pamphlet of why we should have more nuclear power stations. It's not that they physically can't, its' that they just won't because their personal views stop them from taking in the idea. Lastly there is the informational filter this one is more of an educational block, because its not physical nor personal views that keep the person from understanding it. It's things like the ability to read, to understand a different language or , and an example would be, if an elementary school student read a college student's thesis they just wouldn't be able to understand the idea. All these filters are other problems that keep a medium from being mass communicated.
In the last stage of mass communication there are filters that can prevent people from seeing your idea and understanding it. In the internalization stage there are three filters physical, psychological and informational. The physical filter is a actual problem in a person's body that prevents them from internalizing the data. For example a blind person could not see a movie, nor could a deaf person hear a talk show. This filter can be proven wrong some times like a blind person can read a book as long as it is in braille. Also, a deaf person can still see a movie and understand most of it, especially if they can read lips. The next filter is a psychological filter, which is not a physical but mental problem that keeps someone from internalizing an idea. An example would be if a very strong voiced environment protector tried to internalize a pamphlet of why we should have more nuclear power stations. It's not that they physically can't, its' that they just won't because their personal views stop them from taking in the idea. Lastly there is the informational filter this one is more of an educational block, because its not physical nor personal views that keep the person from understanding it. It's things like the ability to read, to understand a different language or , and an example would be, if an elementary school student read a college student's thesis they just wouldn't be able to understand the idea. All these filters are other problems that keep a medium from being mass communicated.
Saturday, September 13, 2014
Characteristics of a a good journalist- lecture
First thing that you must know as a journalist is what makes a good one. You must find out the qualities that others deem as perfect for the job. Now I believe that there are many good qualities to a good journalist but my first is truth. Truth is essential to any career, and really just life, this helps you earn trust and people depend on new they can trust. Plagiarism is the first thing a journalist must never do. This not only degrades your piece, but you as well. It shows that this piece has no originality, nor does it have anything to make it yours. People will not even look at the things you write if they know that they are not true. The difference between real news and propaganda is the legitimacy of it. What's the point of reading "news" if it has no actual news in it? Truth is a part of journalism that can change the way people think about you and your piece.
The second trait that I deem quite important is being fair and ,yes, I know that it's the first thing you learn as a child. Though it's even more important when you write as a journalist. It separates you from all the bias writers and puts you with the ones really worth reading. The only people who read the bias news are the ones that support that idea or person. Journalists who are fair and take on both sides have pieces that more people will read. It makes your audience so much larger and expands on the knowledge that they already know about the topic. Sometimes these pieces can actually change a person's mind about the topic. Imagine all the pros in being fair there's a larger audience, the chance to expand a person's knowledge and the ability to help them decide. That is what fair writers do and that is why I believe so strongly in being fair. Because being fair can really turn a completely bias piece into something that everyone depends on.
The second trait that I deem quite important is being fair and ,yes, I know that it's the first thing you learn as a child. Though it's even more important when you write as a journalist. It separates you from all the bias writers and puts you with the ones really worth reading. The only people who read the bias news are the ones that support that idea or person. Journalists who are fair and take on both sides have pieces that more people will read. It makes your audience so much larger and expands on the knowledge that they already know about the topic. Sometimes these pieces can actually change a person's mind about the topic. Imagine all the pros in being fair there's a larger audience, the chance to expand a person's knowledge and the ability to help them decide. That is what fair writers do and that is why I believe so strongly in being fair. Because being fair can really turn a completely bias piece into something that everyone depends on.
What a Wonderful Blog- http://bluerthanink.blogsopt.com/
I have been looking at the blogs and so far Kaelyn's has really impressed me. It has not only in-depth answers and explanations of the lectures, but of other's ideas as well. In one of her lectures Kaelyn is talking about why we still have newspapers. I completely agree with her response that, "Newspapers aren't dying, people. They may just have a slight cold due to the internet, but it's nothing they can't handle.". She goes on to describe us as "Creature of habit" and how that is a large reason newspapers still exist. Her answers are backed up with good reasons and her writing is something that I really admire. I advise you to take a look at her blog and read her wonderful work.
Kaelyn's blog
Kaelyn's blog
Monday, September 8, 2014
"Don't bite the hand that feeds you"- Binary models of communication lecture
We have all heard, at some point, the saying "don't bite the hand that feeds you". Most of the time it is used on a child that talks back to it's parent. Though sometimes it is used when an employee talks back to his/her boss. The same concept resides in both, the idea that you should watch what you say to the important people, or the people that mean the most in that situation. This also applies to journalism through rating. Television shows are rated by the people who watch them, and if made angry the fans will turn. Shows get cancelled because of low ratings and that is why people in that business are populist. Their whole job is to make the public happy, so that means that they must show what the people want. The main reason that a show gets cancelled is the ratings, but also the advertisements. The show makes money on displaying other company's ads. If the corporation, paying to air their commercial, sees that no one is watching they will pull their ads. Which in turn will take away the revenue collected by the show. The saying "don't bite the hand that feeds you" is used very commonly and has an especially large effect on the journalism field. They use this to keep their shows popular so that they keep earning money.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)