This week, we discussed headlines. I think headlines are the most important aspect of journalism a reporter needs to know. If you don’t have a good headline, people will not read your story. If people are not reading your stories, how could any reporter expect to move up in the world?
This brings me to my next point. I don’t know how professional papers do it, but why does the DI have the copy editors write the headlines? The reporter knows the story best. The reporter is one who went out and talked to sources. The reporter has a feel for the story that no one has. Shouldn’t the reporter be writing the headline? I think so.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Our Industry in 10 years
This week in lecture, we were asked where we see our industry in 10 years. I would like to add my two cents. Honestly, I feel newspapers will be no more in 10 years. All news, other than TV and radio, will be online. People will start having to pay to visit Web sites such as nytimes.com and chicagotribune.com. I also see protests outside of newspaper buildings begging them to print again.
This may seem like a bleak future, but with new times come new technology. Let’s face it; people are not paying for a newspaper anymore. They are going online, for free, where they can search for what they want to read. Old school people will not like it, but these are the times we are living. Better get use to a computer screen.
This may seem like a bleak future, but with new times come new technology. Let’s face it; people are not paying for a newspaper anymore. They are going online, for free, where they can search for what they want to read. Old school people will not like it, but these are the times we are living. Better get use to a computer screen.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Understanding Diversity
This week I would like to talk about my conclusion from my research paper. I researched newsroom diversity. For the last 15 years, newsroom diversity has stayed relatively consistent at around 12 percent. Honestly, I feel that this number is fine.
Obviously, minorities will not agree with me. They will argue that in order to cover a diverse populace, you need a diverse newsroom. This is simply not true. Journalists are professionals. They need to master their craft. They need to be able to cover topics that don’t relate to them. The reporters themselves can and need to cover a diverse population.
Keith Woods, the diversity guru from Poynter, helped journalists with this problem when he came up with the equation E = w (y + c + f). E stands for excellence. W is the amount of work. C is your craft and f is your frames. Woods substitutes excellence for diversity because journalism is not about diversity. In “The Values and Craft of American Journalism,” Woods explains why he didn’t put D into the equation. He says that all journalists in a free press adhere to the same principles. “They stand for truth, accuracy, fairness, courage, precision, comprehensiveness, independence, giving voice to the voiceless, holding the powerful accountable, informing, educating, taking people where they can’t or wont go” (Woods 106).
Our job is bigger than diversity. Our responsibility is to the people. To fulfill our responsibility, we need to understand them. We need to get out of our comfort zones. We need to feel comfortable asking questions. These are the things the journalism industry should be concentrating on, especially in a time of economic uncertainty. These ideas, as Woods says, are “an ageless journalistic truth, not new math” (115).
Obviously, minorities will not agree with me. They will argue that in order to cover a diverse populace, you need a diverse newsroom. This is simply not true. Journalists are professionals. They need to master their craft. They need to be able to cover topics that don’t relate to them. The reporters themselves can and need to cover a diverse population.
Keith Woods, the diversity guru from Poynter, helped journalists with this problem when he came up with the equation E = w (y + c + f). E stands for excellence. W is the amount of work. C is your craft and f is your frames. Woods substitutes excellence for diversity because journalism is not about diversity. In “The Values and Craft of American Journalism,” Woods explains why he didn’t put D into the equation. He says that all journalists in a free press adhere to the same principles. “They stand for truth, accuracy, fairness, courage, precision, comprehensiveness, independence, giving voice to the voiceless, holding the powerful accountable, informing, educating, taking people where they can’t or wont go” (Woods 106).
Our job is bigger than diversity. Our responsibility is to the people. To fulfill our responsibility, we need to understand them. We need to get out of our comfort zones. We need to feel comfortable asking questions. These are the things the journalism industry should be concentrating on, especially in a time of economic uncertainty. These ideas, as Woods says, are “an ageless journalistic truth, not new math” (115).
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Writing Captions
Until this week, I never knew how hard it was to write captions. I honestly thought photographers had one of the easiest jobs in the world. All they have to do is take a picture and then describe it. Until you have actually written caption, you have no idea how hard that is.
How about writing lead-in captions? The photographers have to not only describe the picture in three words or less, but also have to grab the reader’s attention. It’s not like a headline where you can explain more in the lead. You have to do everything in three words or less. That is not easy. I almost feel lucky that I want to be a reporter and not a photographer.
I know no one except people in our class will be reading this, but this post is meant for people not in journalism. It is a call out to all those people who think being a photographer is so easy. Go to newspaper Web site and try to write a caption or two for stories you know nothing about. Try to write a caption in less than three words and then ask yourself; would people read this story? I am willing to bet you can’t do this as fast as you think. Good luck.
How about writing lead-in captions? The photographers have to not only describe the picture in three words or less, but also have to grab the reader’s attention. It’s not like a headline where you can explain more in the lead. You have to do everything in three words or less. That is not easy. I almost feel lucky that I want to be a reporter and not a photographer.
I know no one except people in our class will be reading this, but this post is meant for people not in journalism. It is a call out to all those people who think being a photographer is so easy. Go to newspaper Web site and try to write a caption or two for stories you know nothing about. Try to write a caption in less than three words and then ask yourself; would people read this story? I am willing to bet you can’t do this as fast as you think. Good luck.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Our Industry
This week, the journalism industry took another big hit. Certain papers have decided to decrease their circulation or even go to online only. This is just another casualty of the economy. This is probably the third or fourth time this semester where we discussed a topic that makes me question why I am going into journalism. Why am I going into journalism? Is it because I have the need to know things? Is it because I want to be underpaid? Is it because I want to do sports writing? The fact is I am not sure. I'm sure I am not alone on this case.
It is hard for a 21-year-old to figure out what he is going to do with the rest of his life.
I think we need to discuss more positive issues in class. We should be talking about why journalism is such a great career. We should talk about how important our future jobs are. Let’s be optimistic for a change.
It is hard for a 21-year-old to figure out what he is going to do with the rest of his life.
I think we need to discuss more positive issues in class. We should be talking about why journalism is such a great career. We should talk about how important our future jobs are. Let’s be optimistic for a change.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Diversity
Diversity was the topic this week. Honestly, this has been the most interesting topic we have talked about so far. Before taking this class, I thought that all papers did a good job being diverse. I thought, since we are learning how to be diverse in college, professionals in our field must know how. However, after going over some examples in lecture, I realize that’s not the case. How can a paper expect to be diverse if they don’t have a diverse newsroom? The fact is you can’t. Editor in chiefs need to send their reporters out of their comfort zone. If the reporter is white, send them into the African-American community. If the reporter is Jewish, send him to do a story about a church giving back. Through diversity we can have understanding. But I’m sure all major papers knew that already.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Take a Chance on Language
This week in lecture, we talked about language that newspapers tend to avoid. I am here to tell the publishers to take a chance.
Language is our way of communication. Sometimes, “bad words” are needed to tell a story. Here are two examples.
Let’s say a man was just arrested for killing his wife. The local media got the arrest on tape and some quotes on their recorders. While the police were taking him away, he said to the media, “I killed her because it was my fucking right to kill her.” Now, despite the fact that this quote is crazy, it adds color to the story. Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t reporters supposed to quote color? I realize that papers have to look out for their entire audience, but realistically, who would be reading this story who hasn’t heard the word “fuck” before?
My second example deals with sports. This really bothers me. We see coaches go off on TV swearing every other word. This intensity is what makes sports so great. Why take that away? If a coach says, “We need to beat those cross-town bitches,” it adds flavor to the story. It shows how much these teams despise each other. It creates a better atmosphere at the park. It builds up the rivalry.
This is my call to publishers to take a chance with their language. A good newspaper is careful. A great newspaper takes chances. Anyone agree?
Language is our way of communication. Sometimes, “bad words” are needed to tell a story. Here are two examples.
Let’s say a man was just arrested for killing his wife. The local media got the arrest on tape and some quotes on their recorders. While the police were taking him away, he said to the media, “I killed her because it was my fucking right to kill her.” Now, despite the fact that this quote is crazy, it adds color to the story. Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t reporters supposed to quote color? I realize that papers have to look out for their entire audience, but realistically, who would be reading this story who hasn’t heard the word “fuck” before?
My second example deals with sports. This really bothers me. We see coaches go off on TV swearing every other word. This intensity is what makes sports so great. Why take that away? If a coach says, “We need to beat those cross-town bitches,” it adds flavor to the story. It shows how much these teams despise each other. It creates a better atmosphere at the park. It builds up the rivalry.
This is my call to publishers to take a chance with their language. A good newspaper is careful. A great newspaper takes chances. Anyone agree?
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Racism in Papers
This week I would like to address a letter that was written by a DI staff member. Terrell Starr, DI staff reporter, wrote a letter to the Editor in Chief Steve Contorno about the DI’s coverage of the Cotton Club after-party. My first thought was that this letter was going to be another boring editorial. I was wrong.
Terrell’s words really showed me how important is to be careful with our words. In our text, “When Words Collide,” the authors addressed this issue in chapter 12.
“Language should help us appreciate and write about differences among people as it promotes fairness and tolerance.”
Starr hit this rule right on. Starr talked about choosing our words wisely, always keeping in mind the unintentional messages we send to our readers.
“I am writing this to you because I care about the unintentional messages we are sending our readers,” Starr wrote to Contorno.
Honestly, I have never really thought about this issue, other than in journalism classes. I always assumed that the DI, Chicago Tribune and other major newspapers did a good job of fairly representing all races and groups. I never realized that unintentional messages could be inferred from seeing certain headlines next to each other. After reading Starr’s letter, I am always going to be looking for those inadvertent messages papers are sending. Hopefully, through recognizing these messages, I myself will never be the one who sends a mixed message to his readers. Thanks Terrell.
Terrell’s words really showed me how important is to be careful with our words. In our text, “When Words Collide,” the authors addressed this issue in chapter 12.
“Language should help us appreciate and write about differences among people as it promotes fairness and tolerance.”
Starr hit this rule right on. Starr talked about choosing our words wisely, always keeping in mind the unintentional messages we send to our readers.
“I am writing this to you because I care about the unintentional messages we are sending our readers,” Starr wrote to Contorno.
Honestly, I have never really thought about this issue, other than in journalism classes. I always assumed that the DI, Chicago Tribune and other major newspapers did a good job of fairly representing all races and groups. I never realized that unintentional messages could be inferred from seeing certain headlines next to each other. After reading Starr’s letter, I am always going to be looking for those inadvertent messages papers are sending. Hopefully, through recognizing these messages, I myself will never be the one who sends a mixed message to his readers. Thanks Terrell.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Photo Ethics
The pictures of Budd Dwyer are tricky. Reporters and photographers need to establish a line on whether to print or not to print questionable photos. I draw the line at picture 4a. I feel that most people reading the story are old enough to see a man point a gun into his mouth. Some people might say that picture 3a is not appropriate for children. However, do you think that children are reading this story? I doubt it. As far as picture 4a, I don't think this picture would be needed for the story. After reading the story and seeing picture 3a, the readers can infer that Dwyer shot himself.
Picture one is probably one that doesn't have to be used. Unless this dog was some hero, which I doubt, why would this be a major story? Since it's probably not a major story, why include this picture? This event had to have happened locally. This should not be used because children can relate to it. A small child can look at this picture and understand the situation. Even if that child can not read, he can get the idea of the story from the picture. There is a captive audience here, so you need regulation. Even though it was probably in a newspaper or on a Web site, regulation is needed because kids who can't read could still infer the meaning of this tragic situation.
I would not publish picture two. This story was probably a local story. I think the paper could find another picture, without the dead son, that could be used and portray the same emotion. A picture of the family crying or grieving would be just as efficient as this one. Since mothers and fathers never want to see their child in a body bag, or even imagine it, I don't think this picture is ethical.
Picture three is a graphic, yet not a bad picture to use for a publication. I don't think it is unethical to use it. I realize it would be horrible for this man's family to see this picture. However, if I was the editor, I would not run this photograph. They should use a photograph that shows the gun or one that shows the actual killer. If they choose to use pictures of the victims, I would not just show one victim. Even though I don't think using this picture would be unethical, I feel like it would be wrong in regards to representing the story.
Picture four is not real. According to class, this boy is OK. I can't really see someone not dying from this and therefore I think the picture is false. I would publish this picture. Since he is OK, it's not like the picture will affect him or his family much. If it is real, what publisher wouldn't want to run it? People will think it is an outrageous picture. After seeing it, they will definitely want to keep reading the publication. This picture is totally ethical, if it's real.
Picture five is clearly on the other side of the line. This clearly represents a horrible event for this girl. Numerous men groping a girl is a not an image to recreate. This event probably caused years and years of heartache for this girl and her family. These guys should be ashamed of themselves. Alcohol does this to some men. This picture is unethical. I would never use this picture for my publication.
Picture one is probably one that doesn't have to be used. Unless this dog was some hero, which I doubt, why would this be a major story? Since it's probably not a major story, why include this picture? This event had to have happened locally. This should not be used because children can relate to it. A small child can look at this picture and understand the situation. Even if that child can not read, he can get the idea of the story from the picture. There is a captive audience here, so you need regulation. Even though it was probably in a newspaper or on a Web site, regulation is needed because kids who can't read could still infer the meaning of this tragic situation.
I would not publish picture two. This story was probably a local story. I think the paper could find another picture, without the dead son, that could be used and portray the same emotion. A picture of the family crying or grieving would be just as efficient as this one. Since mothers and fathers never want to see their child in a body bag, or even imagine it, I don't think this picture is ethical.
Picture three is a graphic, yet not a bad picture to use for a publication. I don't think it is unethical to use it. I realize it would be horrible for this man's family to see this picture. However, if I was the editor, I would not run this photograph. They should use a photograph that shows the gun or one that shows the actual killer. If they choose to use pictures of the victims, I would not just show one victim. Even though I don't think using this picture would be unethical, I feel like it would be wrong in regards to representing the story.
Picture four is not real. According to class, this boy is OK. I can't really see someone not dying from this and therefore I think the picture is false. I would publish this picture. Since he is OK, it's not like the picture will affect him or his family much. If it is real, what publisher wouldn't want to run it? People will think it is an outrageous picture. After seeing it, they will definitely want to keep reading the publication. This picture is totally ethical, if it's real.
Picture five is clearly on the other side of the line. This clearly represents a horrible event for this girl. Numerous men groping a girl is a not an image to recreate. This event probably caused years and years of heartache for this girl and her family. These guys should be ashamed of themselves. Alcohol does this to some men. This picture is unethical. I would never use this picture for my publication.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Sentence Types? Really
This week we have the privilege to learn about the different sentence types. Don’t get too excited. As you might recall, these types include; simple, complex, compound, and wait for it, compound complex. Since we have already gone over what each sentence type consists of, I don’t feel the need to reiterate. My question for this week is, why do we have to learn sentence types?
I realize grammar is part of the journalism field. In order to be a great journalist, one must master his or her entire field. However, sentence types are where I draw the line. I understand that it is of vital importance to know what nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc are; but why sentence types? Will an editor ever come up to us and say, “I think you need more compound sentences instead of all those complex ones”? Or will he say, “I think you need to add a dependent clause to this sentence”? Since I haven’t worked in a real newsroom, I can’t be sure, but I highly doubt it.
So once again, I ask, why do we need to know the different sentence types? According to our book, “When Words Collide,” when studying how sentences are created, or in other words, sentence types, “it’s easy to feel so overwhelmed with definitions, exceptions, rules and regulations that we forget we are already experts.” So if these definitions and terms just confuse us, why study them? The book later goes on to say that the goal of studying these terms is good writing. I can’t see how these terms will make my writing better. In fact, from the confusion, I could see them making my writing worse. Anyone agree?
I realize grammar is part of the journalism field. In order to be a great journalist, one must master his or her entire field. However, sentence types are where I draw the line. I understand that it is of vital importance to know what nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc are; but why sentence types? Will an editor ever come up to us and say, “I think you need more compound sentences instead of all those complex ones”? Or will he say, “I think you need to add a dependent clause to this sentence”? Since I haven’t worked in a real newsroom, I can’t be sure, but I highly doubt it.
So once again, I ask, why do we need to know the different sentence types? According to our book, “When Words Collide,” when studying how sentences are created, or in other words, sentence types, “it’s easy to feel so overwhelmed with definitions, exceptions, rules and regulations that we forget we are already experts.” So if these definitions and terms just confuse us, why study them? The book later goes on to say that the goal of studying these terms is good writing. I can’t see how these terms will make my writing better. In fact, from the confusion, I could see them making my writing worse. Anyone agree?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Covering Sports for the DI
This week I would like to talk about how the Daily Illini covers sports.
Two of the earliest rules we learn as journalists is to always be objective and representative. Being objective is not that hard. You just got to put your biases to the side and write the story. As long as you clearly represent both sides of the issue, without a bias, you are being objective.
As far as being representative, this is where it gets tricky. It is the job of a paper/reporter to represent their entire society. In the old days, this came up because papers were not representing the minorities (with a race and political aspect). Well, minorities go for sports as well.
I would like to know why the DI does not cover the low key sports more often. Where are the cross country stories? Where are the wrestling stories? Where are the soccer stories? I realize that none of these sports make as much money as the football or basketball teams, but doesn't the paper owe it to them to be representative? Isn't it the paper's job to cover them at least half as much, if not an equal, to that of football and basketball teams?
This is my call out to the editors, and I know we have some in class, to try to come up with more sport stories other than football and basketball.
Since the DI is free, people won't stop reading it if it doesn't have all football and basketball stories. The DI has an obligation to all athletes of the University, not just the ones who we all know. That is the definition of being representative.
Two of the earliest rules we learn as journalists is to always be objective and representative. Being objective is not that hard. You just got to put your biases to the side and write the story. As long as you clearly represent both sides of the issue, without a bias, you are being objective.
As far as being representative, this is where it gets tricky. It is the job of a paper/reporter to represent their entire society. In the old days, this came up because papers were not representing the minorities (with a race and political aspect). Well, minorities go for sports as well.
I would like to know why the DI does not cover the low key sports more often. Where are the cross country stories? Where are the wrestling stories? Where are the soccer stories? I realize that none of these sports make as much money as the football or basketball teams, but doesn't the paper owe it to them to be representative? Isn't it the paper's job to cover them at least half as much, if not an equal, to that of football and basketball teams?
This is my call out to the editors, and I know we have some in class, to try to come up with more sport stories other than football and basketball.
Since the DI is free, people won't stop reading it if it doesn't have all football and basketball stories. The DI has an obligation to all athletes of the University, not just the ones who we all know. That is the definition of being representative.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Bruce Weber
Is there any reason why Bruce Weber is not getting the credit he deserves? The University of Illinois men's basketball has already won 17 games this year. Anyone know how many games they won last? 16. How about that suffocating orange crush home court advantage everyone used to talk about. Last year, the team finished with a 7-8 record at home. Thus far, the team has recorded an 11-1 record at Assembly Hall. Even more impressive, the fighting illini lost two of their top three scores from last season. What has changed? Players? Coachs? Easier schedule? The answer is nothing.
Bruce Weber has gone back to his old ways of concentrating on defense. Illinois currently has the highest assist to turnover ratio in the Big Ten. That means for every turnover they have, they produce more assists than any other team in the conference.
Soem might say this season has been a fluke so far. It certainly has not. Bruce Weber has transformed this team into something special. Illinois is currently ranked No. 20 in the nation and No. 2 in the Big Ten. Bruce Weber deserves this credit.
Bruce Weber has gone back to his old ways of concentrating on defense. Illinois currently has the highest assist to turnover ratio in the Big Ten. That means for every turnover they have, they produce more assists than any other team in the conference.
Soem might say this season has been a fluke so far. It certainly has not. Bruce Weber has transformed this team into something special. Illinois is currently ranked No. 20 in the nation and No. 2 in the Big Ten. Bruce Weber deserves this credit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)