Al Franken Questions Sonia Sotomayor

As Professor Banisky speculated, Al Franken did in fact inject humor into his questioning of Sonia Sotomayor. NBC Nightly News featured a clip of Franken badgering Sotomayor about an episode of Perry Mason, which she cited as being her childhood inspiration for entering law. His comments sparked a few laughs. Do you think that Franken's sense of humor undermines his credibility as a senator?

Real Writers Don't Burn Out

Wow. Murray's piece was awe-inspiring. Like Murray, I have always been a writer, pursuing both creative and journalistic writing. However, I have not had the gumption to defy the norm that Murray seems to have. His article suggested to me that perhaps I have been too easily succumbing to teachers' and editors' expectations. I write a news article that is clean, well-written and much-appreciated by my newspaper advisor; thereafter, I craft every piece like it. Upon reflection, I think that I may have grown too comfortable following the guidelines for writing articles and essays. I may have forgotten that an article can meet every standard (starts with a strong lead, follows the inverted pyramid form, has quotes appropriately placed and is spelling error free) but still lack substance. In the future, I plan to compose my articles not for the editor, but for the reader. In essence, I hope to write pieces more innovatively, and in turn create a more creative product. The only question is: where to start?

Can Journalism bring change?

This morning in the Washington Post, there was an article that caught my eye.  Yesterday in the House of Representatives, the Democrats proposed a bill that would increase taxes for the richest 2 million people.  The purpose of this bill is to support Medicaid's growing coverage of lower class citizens.  Medicaid is used to pay for lower income families medical care and similar programs help provide insurance to those who could not normally afford it.  This bill plans to take care of this issue in the United States.  Future plans for Medicaid involve having 97 percent of citizens covered by insurance by 2015.  Having the American people insured could possibly help lower the expanding costs of medical procedures, and therefore benefitting the entire country. There is one bad thing about this bill, besides the 1.2 trillion dollar cost.  To cover half of the cost, the government plans on reducing federal the budget that is allotted for Medicare ( this is medical coverage for the elderly and disabled).  By doing so, those who they are trying to help are getting hurt, if the elderly struggle now what will happen when their budget is cut further?  

When I first read this article I thought it would be a great idea. Yes, taxes increases are not necessarily the best but if you can afford to give it than it worth having others receive basic care.  But upon reading further I realized that it isn't as great a bill as expected; it takes away coverage from others meanwhile providing more care for those who need it.  It becomes the question of who needs the care more.  I think that this is a question that is impossible to answer when both rely heavily on it. After considering this, I realized how important journalism is.  If it had not been for a journalist sitting on the floor in the House, no one would have known about the possibility of this, or been able to voice their concerns. This somewhat relates to our conversation with Mary Hartney, in that old media and new media have come together to get out important information.  But my question is, how can we use new media to voice concerns or ideas about government policies? Not only voice them, but actually have people listen, and follow through with a solution? 

Wikipedia-BEWARE!

Wikipedia, a website that we have all used at some point.  I would use lyrics to look up information for papers, to check out new movies, and I would also use it to learn song lyrics. However, since anyone can edit this website, it is a source that needs to be "backed up". I think that it is a great way to start research or just look up some quick facts. But when one is writing a paper, one should use additional sources. 

One time when I was researching Queen Elizabeth, I checked out Wikipedia and it said that she was a French Queen. So again, be careful when reading this site. For me, Wikipedia does not count as a source, I think its purpose is to give you background. From reading this website one can figure out what one needs to look up. 

Tell me what you think. 

Did you receive an email from me?

I've just sent an email to the class from Blackboard (elms.umd.edu). If you did not receive it, please let me know.

Here's a possibility: Blackboard uses whatever email you used when you registered for the class. If you're checking a different email account, you might not be seeing my message.

Again, if you have any IT problems (and several of you do), call 301-405-1400 and they'll walk you through the problem.

See you tomorrow.

Your postings are terrific.

All,

I'm finding your blog discussions fascinating. Keep talking.

(In case anyone hasn't chimed in yet: Remember, a part of your final grade depends on your participation. You can pick up on someone else's observations, or you can post on an entire new topic, weighty or light-hearted, short or long. Just share your thoughts.)

Please remember to go into the temp (T) drive on the computers in the journalism building, find your photos and rename the one you'd like to run with the blog. Then Professor Harvey will add them to the blog site.

Thanks.

Will New Media Inevitably Inhibit Journalists?

Unfortunately, I am going to place a black cloud over the “new media” frenzy.

Without a doubt, the internet is making news more accessible to our generation. Now, being the tech-savvy teens that we are, we can find news stories as soon as we click open our homepage. We can check-up on the latest world news and celebrity scandals while on our way to class or on the metro. However, every rose has its thorn.

As an aspiring journalist, this change from old media to new media stirred a doomful question in my mind: Will these new media methods inevitably take away some creativity for journalists? In this day and age, the world is moving at lightning speed. People who want something want fast results. Our level of patience is lowering. Fast food, get-rich-quick gimmicks and typing an e-mail rather than mailing a hand-written letter are just a few examples of the fast-paced lifestyle. In addition, many receive daily fixes of news updates via text message that just provide the bare minimum of top headline information. So, as time progresses, will people move so quickly that they will not want to take the time to read a wordy article when they can just get the naked facts? Will journalism become just a series of bullets? Does this mark the end of the inverted pyramid and will quirky word choice take a turn for the worse?

As much as I wish this was false, I couldn’t help but wonder if this had any sense to it.

Bus Driver Reading

Hi everyone!

The conflict between old and new media seems to be a major theme in this class. Printed newspapers are slowly becoming obsolete as more interactive internet sources are used for news. As exemplified by the sharing of information about the situation in Iran via Twitter and Flickr, the new "citizen journalists" of this internet age have a considerable amount of influence in news.

While not as serious as the events in Iran, I found an instance similar to that situation in which newspapers depended on a "citizen journalist" for information about a story they would otherwise not have been aware of.

An article in today's Washington Post titled "Bus Driver Who Had Book Is Off Md. Route for Now" said that a bus driver was reading as she drove and was photographed by a citizen riding the bus. According to the article, "The Montgomery investigation was prompted by a 34-year-old Silver Spring woman, who provided Channel 7 with photographs she said she took Friday night on Bus 38." Apparently, the driver was reading the entire time that this woman was on the bus, which was for at least 20 minutes.

Not only is this story scary, but it also further presses upon us the importance of "citizen journalism" in our society. While I understand that we cannot rely on citizens for our news all of the time, I believe they make up a central part of how our news is passed along in this new world shaped by the internet, and cell phones.

What do you think about the increasing reliance on "citizen journalists"?
Also, what do you think the penalty should be for this irresponsible and reckless bus driver if it is confirmed (they are currently investigating it more) that she was in fact reading while driving?

And I just want to say that this blog is awesome- you all have such interesting stories and comments to share!

Another View on Facebook and Journalism

After reading Michael's post on how freedom of the press should be issued and how the government could take over, I began reading an article from the Center for Journalism Ethics of the University of Wisconsin Madison. This article mainly talked about the issues concerning offensive journalism and it had a relation to the discussion we had in class today. The article writer Sunny Dhillon included his views on Facebook, and I really wanted to find out if Facebook is indeed some sort of journalism. Sunny Dhillon says that "if we look at Facebook groups as advocacy journalism, as “journalism that advocates a cause or expresses a viewpoint,” often through non-objective means, then the idea isn’t quite so far-fetched." So in this case, the Facebook groups can be an act of journalism. For instance, a group fighting for Gay rights would be basically reporting on different issues that then turn into current events. Everyone on Facebook who chooses to join this group would then be getting a taste of news.

Do you find this sort of connection between Facebook and journalism? If not this connection, we surely did learn more information today from our guest speaker Mary in proportion to her job and how she basically promotes the Baltimore Sun's articles on Facebook and Twitter. What she does pretty much allows these such sites to sort of become a journalist website, along with the obvious fact that people's status's are citizen media.

What is your view on whether Facebook can be seen as a window to journalism with its millions of groups? The link to this article is available once you click on the title of this post.

Government and Media: An Unethical Partnership?

"Big Brother is watching you."

So claim the many billboards in George Orwell's fantastic novel 1984. In this epic story, the English Socialist government has obtained control of nearly every aspect of urban life. The government writes books, records music, creates films, and most importantly, spies on each and every citizen through their upgraded televisions.

Writing is one of the most horrible sins in this government's eyes. Of course, no free press exists.

While America is nowhere near the state of control under which the citizens of Orwell's city suffer, there is a degree of control exercised by our government. America is certainly bounds ahead of China, Burma, North Korea, Iran, and other press-limiting countries. But as Mary Hartney claimed today in her lecture, NPR and other organizations exist through government grants, which can be revoked at any time.

The question I pose is such: What is the government's role in the press? Should the government have any role at all? Should journalists be able to publish whatever they see fit, regardless of political controversies?

Let me know your opinions.

(Also, think of how journalism has permanently altered the American government. Think Watergate.)

"Mobile is the Future"

Hi Everyone! 

I really enjoyed listening to Mary Hartney speak today. When I found out that she was coming to talk to us about the Internet, I was skeptical. I felt this way because I believed that people have become to reliant on new forms of media/technology. However, I was unaware of how effective Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are at getting information across to the public. Using websites such as these enable people to be able to communicate and share information globally. 

Even though I still believe that one should continue to read print, I now think that in addition, one should blog, and communicate through Facebook and Twitter. 

What were your reactions to Mary's presentation? Do you agree with her that "mobile is the new future?" Or do you think that there will be something else? 

elms.umd.edu problems

Hello,

For those of you having trouble signing into Blackboard, the university tech desk says it will talk you through problems.

So, please call 301-405-1400 and wait to speak to a human being. Then check Blackboard daily to look for new assignments, readings, etc.

Thanks for your attention and great questions for Mary Hartney today.

See you tomorrow at 9 a.m. to discuss Wikipedia before we walk over to the library.

The Sotomayor Publicity Stunt

I saw that one more group has started using Sotomayor as a political torpedo. The anti-abortion activists. This information comes from the Washington Post this morning.

From the Washington Post: "Outside the Hart Building, Terry and his band brandished posters of aborted fetuses and children's coffins holding dolls covered in stage blood. A demonstrator dressed in a judge's robes carried the sickle of the Grim Reaper. "

Not only that but with a post of my from yesterday I indicated another Post article about Conservatives and Liberals using this process to fight each other...

Sotomayor seems to be less of an appointed official and more of a weopon for every group who needs to get some exposure. "Conservatives, Liberals, abortion activists OH MY!" -is the phrase in my mind.

I know Obama probably didn't intend for that but look how quickly it has happened.

Piano Men Come Together

What do you do when 28,000 fans are waiting to hear you play, but your instrument has a mind of its own? Ask Elton John, who had that expericence on Saturday July 11, 2009 at Nationals Stadium. He and Billy Joel were set to give the sold-out crowd an evening of rock 'n' roll excitement, when Elton's pedal on his grand piano got stuck on their second number. While looking at the Jumbotron, audience members noticed something was amiss when Elton shouted across stage to Billy during the opening bars of "Don't Let The Sun Go Down On Me."

Elton stopped the song, and said that the damper pedal on his piano was stuck. He could not go on with the show until it was fixed. After an unsucessful attempt by a technician to free the sticky pedal, fellow musician Billy Joel took off his coat and got under the piano himself to try and fix it. When there was no easy fix in sight, Billy, in trouper fashion, quickly called his musicians to the stage, and went on with the show.

The audience readily responded as they sang along to Billy's songs, knowing that Elton's team would fix the problem. After a delightful set of Billy's songs, Elton's piano rose from below stage to the audience's cheers. The piano men were back in business. Elton played a wonderful set of his own songs. They finished the night off joyously playing together Billy Joel's "Piano Man," as the crowd sang along. Only fireworks could have made the evening better!

According to the Washington Post, the performance was "predictable and unimaginative." I would like to know how the Post found this predictable. Watching two professionals recover from a near disaster was entertainment in itself.

The Situation Room

Surely if Mitchell Stephens had written "An Extended History of News" as opposed to "A Short History of News", his article would have included, among other events, journalism's recent introduction to the Internet.

In Chapter 5 of his book "Journalism 2.0", Mark Briggs discusses the media's transition from print to the Web. He stresses the importance of print journalists experimenting with blogging in order to more easily communicate with the public.

But what of television journalism? In response to the public's interest in the instantaneous, interactive news coverage increasingly prevalent on the Internet, many TV newscasts have made media available on their respective Web sites. For instance, NBC Nightly News posts the "latest program" on the front page of its Web site (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/) in addition to links to past programs.

However, CNN's "The Situation Room" with Wolf Blitzer has an entirely different approach to media's transition from the TV screen to the computer screen. Instead of presenting a traditional newscast, "The Situation Room" uses resources found on the 'net (ie: video clips) to supplement its news stories.

"The Situation Room" has a very innovative approach towards journalism's newfound pervasiveness on the Web, and I suggest that all of you check it out!

Seeing Double!

Hello Everyone!

I hope you all are as excited as I am for the new Harry Potter movie! 

While reading the "Baltimore Sun", I came across a really interesting article about an actual man named Harry Potter. I think that it is neat to share a common name with a character from a world famous novel. In this article,  the "real" Harry Potter talked about how he receives numerous phone calls from young kids who think that he is the  Harry Potter from the movies. He seemed to have a good sense of humor for he did not get upset after receiving these frequent calls. 

Reading this article reminded me of Heath Ledger since he was named after Heathcliff from the novel "Wuthering Heights" by Emily Brontë. 

For me, I feel content with "Brooke", but I would not mind being named "Juliet". One of my favorite Shakespeare plays is "Romeo and Juliet." Both Juliet and Romeo go through so much pain in order to be together. I would want to be named after Juliet because I feel that she displayed a lot of courage and followed he heart. I wish that I was more courageous, therefore, I would proudly take her name. 

I was wondering if anybody else wished that they were named after a character from their favorite movie or book. Does anybody have a friend or family member named after a fictional character? 

Let me know :) 

King of Pop Death Coverage: Gone Too Far?

Hello class!! Our first day together was suprisingly more interesting than I thought. I really can not wait for these next weeks with each other, enhancing our skills in journalism and meeting wonderful people connected to this career. Professor Banisky has indeed given me the impression that she knows her stuff, so we should learn a lot.

I'm sure all of you have heard the shocking (and in some cases, unshocking) news of Michael Jackson's death. Media from all around the world has extensive coverage of the King of Pop's sudden passing and in a way, it is bringing the world together. From Russia to Africa and right here in the states, the secrets of Jackson and untold mysteries are trying to unveil with journalists digging deep. This may be one benefit: the world coming together, but there is one problem I can't seem to shake.

Most people are now more than ever starting to realize that Michael Jackson was not just the King of Pop, a Humanitarian, a strange character at times, and seemingly always in trouble with the law. He was also a father; blood or not. After watching the memorial service on live television for Jackson at the Staple's center in Los Angeles, I couldn't help but notice exactly how human Michael was to his family. I was brought to tears when his daughter Paris spoke about how her Daddy was the best father to her. The Washington Post.com felt that moment was "pure and private" and, "the truest thing of the whole show." I felt a strong sense of sympathy for her, just as I think most news shows like CNN Headline news felt. Most news anchors for that station are expressing their views on Michael's children with heartfelt feelings, and I find that very respectful. Nancy Grace is known for her "tough love" attitude when it comes to finding the facts, but after watching her show these last couple of days, I believe her sympathetic side is coming out.

My main question here is, "Does the world of journalism ever go too far when society wants closure?" I completely understand this is a higly controverstial and extremely talented celebrity we're talking about, but the man died and has a family going through a tough time. When will the closure of his death come to an end? My guess is two years from now, when most people have forgotten.

I guess if I try to answer my own question, I would say that the only reason reporters across the globe are covering Michael Jackson's death so in depth would be because he was just that important. Neither Farrah Fawcett nor Ed Mcmahan recieved as much coverage on their deaths, which occured in the same week (In Farrah Fawcett's case, she was pretty much washed out by MJ's death). Not to say these two television icons aren't important, because I strongly believe anyone on this earth has some sense of importancy. It's just that Michael Jackson had an important appeal to many more, which is why his magnetism to the media gives them the need to close his life for him.

Tell me what you think..

Iran's Imaginary Embassy: Resurgence of Cold War Paranoia?

According to The Washington Post, the U.S. government has vacillated in their opinions about the Iranian Embassy in Nicaragua. There is, The Washington Post claims, no "mega-embassy" in Nicaragua, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton had earlier claimed.

This type of fiery anti-Iran rhetoric seems to be the same intense wordplay that the U.S. used in their 1970s and 1980s surveillance and weapons-upgrading programs. My question is: How many other illogical or inane topics will be raised by our elected officials about such Iranian schemes, and will the American public be misled by the blanket scapegoat of "The enemy has to do with this"? As a citizen interested in both the news and foreign affairs, I believe that the American people deserve to know the truth about the U.S. government's interests in foreign countries, and especially the truth about their dealings with Iran.

Although the government of Iran loudly boasts of the success of their theocratic democracy (a contradiction in itself), we have seen immense Iranian public dissent in the previous weeks. Twitter, along with other online resources, has opened a world of communications surrounding the election protests. Ahmadinejad is undoubtedly a corrupt and dangerous leader, but that does not justify the U.S. government's indiscriminate use of Iran as a scapegoat for any mysterious international matters.

I am also reminded of the Bush Administration's policy of getting information from terrorists in any way possible, torture included. Will the Obama Administration continue to use fear mongering and paranoia to their advantage?

Please let me know your opinions.