Living for the "Memoiries"

From Walt Harrington, in one of the readings for Monday:

"I could go on with example after of example of such reporting -- the astronomer I went out with at 5:30 a.m. on a clear morning to know for sure what I was seeing in the sky on our hunting mornings; the compass watch I wore to always know which direction was which at any particular moment; the thermometer I used to record the water temperature at the mouth of the Old Collins spring in winter and summer (a steady 51 degrees); the old White House records reporting that I had sipped La Crema Reserve Chardonnay and ate smoked salmon mousse at a particular state dinner; the academic journal articles establishing that 75 percent of rabbits born in any given year are already dead from disease, weather, and predation by the time hunting season rolls around in the fall; the National Weather Service records that give the local temperature and weather conditions by the hour for the days and years I hunted; and the soil conservation map that gives the 700-, 800-, and 900-foot elevations of the mountains in Lawson Bottom."

This is an interesting quote, and it brought a thought to my mind: at what point does a memoir writer stop actually living and cross over into sheer documentation of the events around him/her? This passage gave me the impression that Harrington's attention to detail and penchant for fact-gathering caused him to be constantly scribbling on a pad about everything around him.

An example of living life for the sake of recording it can be literally seen on YouTube, where a user named "iJustine" records her life every day. This process is called "lifelogging," and usually involves wearing a physical camera on one's head. iJustine essentially lets millions of Internet users see her entire life nearly every day.

To further digress, a movie came out a few years ago called "The Truman Show," with Jim Carrey as the lead. This man lived his life unaware of the fact that hidden cameras recorded his every move in the small town in which he lived. The film is an interesting look into the rapidly expanding viral world of sharing one's life over media outlets.

Harrington is similar to iJustine and Truman in the sense that he is sharing parts of his life with the world. Through his memoir, the reader can view the events as Harrington saw them. This is quite a valuable insight.

However, I fear he may not have truly taken in all of his surroundings during these trips, for he was too busy with his nose in his notebook.

On the other hand, maybe he enjoyed these trips more because he was able to so fully understand every intricacy of the occasions. This is likely the case.

What do you think? Did he ruin his hunting or did he enhance it by taking notes for his memoir?

Also, what are your opinions about lifelogging? Have you found yourself at an event or hanging out with friends and thinking to yourself, "I can't wait to get home and blog about this" (or post on Facebook or Twitter)?

Saving Lives Just Part of the Job

Please follow the link and read the article. It's pretty amazing.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=%2Fchronicle%2Farchive%2F2001%2F01%2F10%2FMN160983.DTL

I just thought I would share this with you guys because of the way I stumbled across it...my friend posted it on Facebook.

It is just interesting how one person finds these fascinating articles and can post them on Facebook and then they can get passed on to blogs and other networking sites over and over again so that thousands of people read it.

About the article itself, I think this is a great example of a good lede.

"If you're an ironworker on the Golden Gate Bridge and your home phone rings at 3 a.m., you know it's trouble."

It's only one sentence, but it so perfectly captures the tone, the urgency, and the location so compactly. It really makes you want to continue reading.

What do you guys think about this article? What are your thoughts about the extent to which a simple article like this can spread like wildfire via the internet?

WMUC!!!!

Brooke asked a great question that we all seemed to come to an agreement on at the radio station. As Scottie said, radio is indeed losing its popularity. I, however, had to admire the fact that he is so dedicated and enthusiastic about radio that he doesn't see an end near. Though the internet and television may have the most control over grabbing audiences, I love to see that the two underdogs (print and radio) are fighting strong.

Today's trip was extremely great and I thank Professor Banisky for arranging this for us. Scottie and Jamal were excellent and I think we pounded them with every question in the book. I wouldn't be suprised if many of your views on radio have changed after that visit. I know I feel more appreciative of radio, especially at this school. Considering workers at WMUC do not get paid and they have to withstand that unbearably hot building, I have full respect for what they do. I think the most important aspects are that they simply love what they are doing and they want to keep learning. Overall, this trip gave me true insight into broadcasting and what it really takes. I look forward to digging deeper into it and some day fulfilling this type of career.

I honestly thought campus radio stations were open to only campus students who never really listen to it. Now I see just how far a small FCC credited station can get.

Hey, you may just be thinking about tuning into some 88.1 soon...

College

I feel as though every teen in the young scholars program enjoys the college life and the living arrangements without any parently guidance, however there is extreme responsibilty when it comes to living on your own.

Starting with academics, I think everyone feels very appreiciative becasue they dont have their parents breathing down there necks about homework and study time, however sometimes that parental guidance is needed. Through adequate amount of downtime, new friends, and campus activities its hard to focus on academics. There's were the real independence comes in and you have to choose friends over education, and most of the time peer pressure wins.

Secondly, the eating habits get worse by the day. Usually parents make sure that you have a well- balanced meal, however, when on your own, a well- balanced meal has a whole new meaning. Typically a well- balanced meal is pizza, chips, soda and ice cream which is usaually food that tires you out, and again looses your focus on your academics.

Journalism 150, tell me about you new semi- college experiences and how great you are with time management.

How a Typo Ruins an Article

From The Washington Post's latest Sotomayor article:

"Cornyn said he did not what to tell his constituents what to think about what he said were competing portraits of her: an activist judge whose speeches praise ethnic pride and describe how life experiences influence decision-making, or a restrained jurist who values precedent and rule of law."

Obviously, the error is that the word "know" is missing in between "not" and "what" near the beginning of the sentence. But without that word -- even if you fill in the blank yourself -- the rest of the sentence dissolves into an unintelligible mess. And it was a long sentence anyway, which is always risky if you're trying to keep the reader interested. I ended up confused by this sentence, and had to read it again. Just letting you all know that typographical errors do cause serious confusion, and must be taken seriously for this reason.

Radio Station

Hi everyone.
I am really excited to go to the radio station tomorrow. I think it will be really neat to see the process ones go through in order to report news on the air. Personally, this will be my first time going to radio station. Has anyone else been before? Also, what do you all think is the most effective way of getting out the news? Maybe by print or web? Radio or T.V?
Tell me what you think.

Wikipedia In the Newsroom

Many people believe Wikipedia is an absolutely unreliable source to use for reseach. Surprisingly, newsrooms are begining to accept Wikipedia as a informational source. Although it may be unreliable, there are still trusted facts that can be used. Donna Shaw stated, "Wikipedia can be used as a starting point for reporters to immerse themselves in a topic." I agree with Donna, while on the other hand, why use Wikipedia if you are forced to check their facts, as Shaw said, "use other cites to check Wikipedia's accuracy." Emerging from experiences I've had, Wikipedia entries are sometimes factual and reliable, but can still be carelessly updated and untrue. Journalism150 give me your feedback on your experiences with Wikipedia and what you think.

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?