End of class

Class, thanks to all of you for your hard work during this whirlwind summer session!

You had a lot to do during a compressed schedule; I'm impressed by your efforts.

As promised, I'll send back your final in-class story within the next two weeks. I also hope to have your final grades submitted within the next two weeks.

I'll be looking through this blog one more time, while I consider your class participation grades. All entries must have been submitted by the end of class on Aug. 1 to count toward the participation grade.

I hope I'll see some of you on campus in a year!

Take care, and have a great August!

Worthy Google challenger?

I recently learned of a new search engine very similar to Google called Cuil. It was actually developed by a former employee of Google, Anna Patterson. The new search engine is said to cover even more of the Web and be more appealing, with graphics and a "magazine-like" format. 

After visiting the site myself, I found that yes the site is more attractive than Google, but I also found it to be more difficult to find what I was looking for.

Google is arranged neatly, and it is easier to search the sites for what you are looking for.

Cuil, on the other hand, is arranged more horizontally and has many more graphics and pictures. I found this to be too busy, but will others enjoy it? Google has not ever changed its format. Will this new site be more intriguing to viewers?

Google has faced many challengers throughout the years, such as Microsoft and Yahoo! However, Google has continued to beat these search engines.

Will Cuil actually pose a significant threat to the site? If so, what will this mean for the future of the Internet?

When we watched that video in class about the future of the Internet, Google had taken over most sites including Amazon. Will people switch over to Cuil and leave the beloved Google behind?

Cuil article- Yahoo!

Alert from campus police

Class, given our talk about safety this morning with Cpt. John Brandt, I thought you'd be interested to see this press release he put out at 1:21 p.m. today, as a crime alert. This is the verbatem transcript:

"CAMPUS ALERT, July 31, 2008

"There have been several reliable sightings of an animal fitting the description of a cougar on the campus. The description of the sighted cat is: light tan and tawny brown, about 4 feet long with a 4 foot tail, and weighing about 50 pounds. Several sightings have been reported from the area of Cole Field House, near the Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center, and continuing through the wooded areas to the area of the Comcast Center and Arena Drive Garage. There has been no report of
aggressive behavior on the part of the animal, but community members are warned that cougars are a predatory species and that, if seen, the animal should not be approached.

"If you see the animal, please contact the university police at 301-405-3555. University police are working with other agencies to remove the animal from the campus area."

It would have made a great little story this morning, wouldn't it?

And beyond that -- please be careful today!

China's plans to censor the Web

We spent a great deal of the past three weeks learning about the Internet and World Wide Web in a journalism class; but why exactly? The answer, as if any of us don't already know it, is that journalists have a very strong dependancy on the World Wide Web. The Web can serve as a place for a journalist to not only get information, but also to share their own published work. 

All of that being said, it's interesting, among other things, that China plans to censor the Internet and Web usage for foreign journalists during the upcoming Olympic Games being held in Beijing. China regularly censors its citizens and what they can view on the Web, which I have to admit seems bizarre to me, but is it really fair of China to keep foreign workers from doing their job? Especially considering the Olympic Games are organized by ... the International Olympic Committee, which should be able to make the rules and call the shots, rather than the host city having too much control. 

China has been surrounded by a lot of controversies lately, and it seems that this censorship will just become another. Controversies that China hopes to go virtually unnoticed, considering it plans on blocking sites like Amnesty International or any site regarding Tibet. 

It'll be interesting to see if the writing style of the reporters covering the Olympics will change, if the once seemingly unlimited realm of the World Wide Web will soon become very limited for these foreign reporters; limited to sites only regarding the games that they are covering. 

CNN Article

New York Times Article

Journalism and the Olympics

It has been recently announced by the International Olympic Committee that China has decided that various Web sites on the Internet will be blocked and thus unable to be accessed by journalists during the Olympic games.

This decision was made, of course, after China had promised unlimited access to the Internet, and would provide the "media with the same freedom to report on the Games as they enjoyed at previous Olympics" (Nick Mulvenney, Washington Post. Link below.)

But journalists this week have not been able to have access to "sites deemed sensitive to [China's] communist leadership."

The Chinese government is arguing that the sites blocked are not necessary to journalists or their stories. They believe that the censorship will in no way hinge reporting and covering the Games.

The Amnesty International's Web site is perhaps the most talked about blocked site in China. After it released a report on Monday discussing how China has failed "to honor its Olympic human rights pledges," the site was blocked and can still not be accessed.

China has obviously broken a promise to the IOC and the world. But since it is the host country, is it allowed to censor visitors -- a large part of them journalists simply trying to do their jobs -- for the duration of the Olympic games, unless they concur with the communist government?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/30/AR2008073000991.html

Affirmative Action: Divisive or necessary?

After reading an article about John McCain's endorsement to end affirmative action, I began wondering whether the system is still necessary.

McCain has been on record against such quotas for quite some time, but this seems to be the firmest stance he's taken on affirmative action so far.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/27/AR2008072701832.html)

Sen. Barack Obama criticized McCain, saying, "I am disappointed...that John McCain flipped and changed his position." When discussing the affirmative action system, Obama said, "You know, the truth of the matter is, these are not designed to solve a big problem, but they're all too often designed to drive a wedge between people."

Although affirmative action was initially created to rid of discrimination, has our society reached a point where it is no longer necessary?

Are the intentions of the affirmative action system undermined by the divisions and racial tension it has created?

Or is such a system still necessary in order to assure equal opportunity within education and the work place?

Interview with a police captain

Class, on Thursday Cpt. John Brandt from the University Police will come to our class from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. to let you interview him as a group about campus safety, violence and more.

I'd suggest you take some time today to look through some of the daily crime and incident logs compiled by campus police.

Crime report statistics are also aggregated on this page.

You might also think about some previous incidents on campus that you might want updates on (such as the hanging noose incident last year). Here are some stories on that from my students.

It will be your job to collectively ask enough questions during the hour to come up with your own story, which you will write in the remaining hour and a half of class. I will not tell you what to write; it's your job to find the story during our little in-class press conference.

You'll have a half hour at the start of class on Thursday to compile a list of questions, but doing some backgrounding tonight will help!

Shot in the field

I was reading the homework and the article, "Dangerous Assignment" really got me thinking.

This particular quote: "The trouble is that a lot of the military, particularly the American and the Israeli military, do not want us there. And they make it very uncomfortable for us to work. And I think that this ... is leading to security forces, in some instances, feeling it is legitimate to target us with deadly force and with impunity," from Nik Gowing, makes me so mad.

Does everyone feel the same? I know you'd be putting yourself at risk covering a war story, but shouldn't the military be responsible enough to target the right people?

segregation in prisons

I was looking on the Post's Web site and was reading an article on California prisons and how they were beginning a process of integration. I had no idea they had been segregated, and it actually sort of bothered me to think that years after equal rights movements and changes in Congress that segregation was still alive in the country -- even if it is in prisons.

What are your thoughts on this? I think I pasted the link to the article twice; I'm new to this blogging thing.

Field trip on Monday

Class, a reminder: We're taking a newsroom fieldtrip by bus to washingtonpost.com in Arlington, Va., on Monday morning, where we’ll meet with Chet Rhodes, assistant managing editor for news video, and others. We'll meet in the parking lot on the side of the Journalism Building at 9 a.m.; we'll walk together to the bus pickup at Tawes Theater (the side facing lot 1) at 9:05 a.m.; the bus leaves for Virginia at 9:15 a.m.

We'll get to the Web site around 10:15 a.m. and will stay until around 11:30 or 11:45 a.m. We should be back at the Journalism Building by 12:45 p.m.

The Young Scholars program will be dropping off boxed lunches for all of you.

Also: I'll have a sheet of five brief questions for you to answer based on our visit; your typed responses will be due at the start of class on Tuesday and will count as an in-class grade.

A few reminders about the blog

Class, congrats on getting your photos cropped, sized and posted.

A few other gentle reminders: This blog counts toward your class participation grade. I've been copy editing all of your posts to clean them up for style and grammar, but I'd like you to go into your bios and copy edit them for grammar, punctuation, capitalization and AP style. You're aspiring journalists, and as such need to start taking care with all these points. Please, also, fill in missing words in sentences.

Also, a reminder that you're required to start at least one thread of conversation about media coverage or ethics or current media problems in this blog. Six of you have done so. The rest of you have one week left!

See you Monday morning for our trip to washingtonpost.com.

Invasion of Privacy

One of last night's assigned articles, "Is it Appropriate for Reporters to 'Lurk' in Online Chatrooms?" really got me to think. I thought it was unethical to enter a place where people think they can anonymously post personal information, and then use their personal information to further one's career.

And it isn't just journalists; isn't it a bit unethical for schools or businesses to search prospective students or employees' Facebook pages?

Obama's Foreign Agenda

A few months ago, a commercial aired on television for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kddX7LqgCvc). It preyed on the fears already established in the minds of the American public concerning national security and, for parents, the safety of their children. It implied that Democratic candidate Barack Obama would not be a good president because of his inexperience, making Clinton the obvious choice on that point alone.

In response, Obama sponsored a commercial that said, "...in the real world, it's judgement that matters" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BvyF351RS8&feature=related-- not just experience.

However, according to The Washington Post, Obama traveled to Afghanistan and Kuwait, and is going to Iraq to meet with officials. After that, he is going to Jordan, Israel, Germany, France and Britain to meet other officials and leaders.

It seems that Obama is trying to get some experience to combat the statements of his opponents that say he does not have much experience in foreign affairs. Is Obama trying to gain the trust and approval of America? Is he trying to prove himself worthy of the Oval Office? More importantly: Will the American people notice and take that into consideration for the 2008 elections?

Helpful or Detrimental?

Do Web sites like mediareporttowomen.com and womensenews.com help level the playing field in journalism, or are they a detriment?

Can having a news organization made up solely by women and solely for women be considered discriminatory in its own right?

Does having these segregated organizations sustain the disparity between men and women in journalism?

Are satirical news programs to be trusted?

I am an avid fan of "The Colbert Report," "The Daily Show" and the "Weekend Update" segment of Saturday Night Live. Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart are (in my mind) geniuses of comedy, satire, putting an interesting thought on the news and upcoming important books to read. They come up with great new material every day for their respective shows, and have put some funny stuff in each of their books. I also like reading The Onion and Uncyclopedia, which put a funny spin on newspapers and Wikipedia, repectively. Sure, they make us laugh, but can they really deliver the news in a proper manner? They deliver the news, but it's more for laughs than to be taken seriously. They make us think about our world, and that's a good thing. But they aren't a part of the news media, so we shouldn't go to these sources for our news. We should get the news from respective sources first, form our own opinions, and then test our opinions when we watch the programs on TV or look them up online. So let's not fully trust these programs as being 100 percent true, but maybe more as something to help guide our way to what our opinions on the news are or why the side we are against is saying what it is saying and look deeper into the problem to get a firm grasp on the subject.

Are we in a period of horrible news coverage?

I was looking at CNN.com just now, and I can't believe what I'm seeing. Here are some examples of the stories that they have on there:
"Look out! Driver crashes into bank."
"'Like I was on rollerblades,' says Miss USA."
Here are some examples of what's being featured on CNN Video:
"Volcano spews smoke, lava"
"Man Lives in Tiny House"
"360 Shot: Beauty Queens Fall"
Yes, CNN should have some weird stories on there and yes, it is impossible to constantly show serious news on its 24-hour news channel. But when is it enough? I would only like one, maybe two weird or funny stories or those I don't care about once, maybe twice an hour on the 24-hour news channel. But the news channel is becoming less of a news channel and more of an entertainment channel.
Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace and Showbiz Tonight each getting two to three hours a night?
What about Larry King interviewing celebrities now? He used to interview important or in-the-news people. Now, he's paying Paris Hilton $1 million for an interview! What has the media world come to?

When does satire become inappropriate?

The New Yorker's cover illustration in its most recent issue has attracted commentary and criticism because of its depiction of Sen. Barack Obama dressed as a Muslim, "fist-bumping his gun-toting wife." (The Washington Post, "It's Funny How Humor Is So Ticklish"). It sparks an interesting debate--whether the image is just playful satire or whether it will have an effect the liberal publication certainly doesn't want, a reason for voters to doubt Obama. Conservative talk-show hosts like Sean Hannity have started using the cover as confirmation that Obama is a terrorist, "the candidate of Hamas." Though Hannity and other right-wing organizations would certainly have continued their smear campaigns based on race regardless of the publication, the controversial depiction raises serious questions of taste and editorial responsibility.

See the Washington Post article.
See the cover image.

Welcome!

Class, this site will be used throughout this summer journalism course to post ideas, questions and comments about the media, but also to publish assignments from class.

I'll expect each of you to start at least one thread of discussion pertaining to the media during the next three weeks.

Remember that the world can see this site, but only the class can comment to it.

Please use professional standards and courtesies in your comments: No personal attacks on people, please. No hate comments or profanity. And try to follow rules of grammar and style.

Also: Please remember that your mini profiles don't belong in this post creation area; they should be published as profiles (on the right sidebar).

Looking forward to an interesting class!