Storytelling not dead

This is from Rachel Shulman, a student at UW-Madison:

Prof. Sue Robinson recently sent around this story on how the internet is killing storytelling. In it, Ben Macintyre laments the demise of the narrative. He blames the spawn of the digital age – Twitter, Facebook, blogs, smart phone applications – for the imperilment of the long-form story. According to Macintyre, our reliance on a medium of “interactive chatter and noise” is eroding our culture.

When I read this story, I couldn’t help but be reminded of the philosophy of Neil Postman, a media theorist who was most well known for his 1985 book on television, Amusing Ourselves to Death. Postman deplored technology’s ability to distribute more information faster, arguing that it fills our heads with fragments of irrelevant, disorderly, and superficial information. Postman feared that television meant the demise of the written language and reason; he predicted that its rise signaled the demise of cultural values. Sound familiar?

I don’t think that Postman nor Macintyre give the story reader/listener/watcher enough credit. Long-form narratives aren’t dying – they’re just changing. The internet allows users to piece together their own multi-media narratives from many different sources. I don’t think we can ascribe any more value to narratives that follow a prescribed (and often predictable) structure determined by the storyteller than narratives that follow a network-based structure determined by the user.

Uncertain future of China’s muckraking magazine

The following post is from a UW-Madison Journalism student: Yifei Lieu

China’s most influential business magazine has been thrown into turmoil recently: it has received tons of resignation letters, including its general manager, the top advertising executive, and 70 workers in business department. Even worse, the biweekly magazine may also be about to lose its founding editor, Hu Shuli, and her core journalists allies.

It means, the magazine will be left as an empty shell.

The massive exodus is an expression of discontent by the magazine’s employees over the intensive editorial interference by the magazine’s owner, Stock Exchange Executive Council (SEEC), and a dispute about whether SEEC should surrender its majority control and allow other investors, according to The New York Times, The New Yorker and China Daily. The employee uprising against the publisher is not as common in China as in United States. Actually, it never happened before in China. Will it be a sign of the rising power of media employees in China? Or it will turn into a failed attempt? It’s too early to judge now. For me, an interesting point is: in the employee alliance against the publisher, those in business department resign first, seems the journalists still need more courage.

Caijing magazine, known for its bold coverage of corruption, fraud, pollution and public health care, has possessed more freedom than most Chinese media since its foundation in 1998. Two main reasons account for its unique freedom: one is the laissez-faire editorial policy under an oral agreement between the SEEC and Ms. Hu, and more importantly, it is benefited by Ms. Hu’s perfect editorial judgment: she knows when and how to expose the governing problems without enraging the central government. The judgment comes from both her long-time professional experiences and her intimate private relationship with high-level government authorities. However, with the rise of influence and profit of the magazine in recent years, both the owner and the government have felt more discomfort about the incisive coverage and then given more pressure to the magazine. Finally, the war between the power and the magazine breaks out.

The leaving of Ms. Hu will be a big blow for Caijing magazine. Without Ms. Hu and her core journalists, the muckraking platform may turn into a mediocre and humdrum economic journal. However, it may be not a loss for the investigative media industry in China: if Ms. Hu resigns, she may found a new magazine with the help of other resigned colleagues. If it is true, will it be a new front runner in the investigative report in China? Or will it turn into another victim in the battle against business and government forces? No one knows. But at least we know, the 56-year-old woman, who is called “an incurable muckraker” by The New Yorker, will not easily be stopped.

Journalist or Investigator?

The following post is from UW-Madison student Rachel Shulman:

I recently heard a story on NPR’s “On the Media” that was of particular interest to me as a graduate student in journalism.

Journalism students at Northwestern University and the Cook County District Attorney are battling over the students’ investigation of a 1978 murder, a crime for which Anthony McKinney has been serving a life sentence for over 30 years.

Led by professor David Protess, students conducted the murder investigation as part of the Medill Innocence Project, a non-profit directed by Protess that aims to free wrongfully convicted people.

During the students’ three-year investigation, two eyewitnesses responsible for McKinney’s conviction recanted their testimonies, saying that the police bullied them into lying about witnessing the murder. The students presented this finding in addition to other materials suggesting McKinney’s innocence to the Center for Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern’s law school in 2006.

Recently, the Cook County District Attorney subpoenaed these investigative materials, in addition to the students’ grades, performance evaluations, emails, expense reports, and interview notes. Lawyers in the attorney’s office claim that they need these materials to assess whether the students had a grade incentive to find McKinney innocent.

Northwestern’s journalism school counters that, although the Innocence Project has helped release 11 inmates – including five from death row –the project has also had student investigations’ find convicts guilty.

The District Attorney maintains that the students do not deserve the same protections afforded to journalists because the students are investigators rather than reporters.

Northwestern Dean John Lavine says that the students’ investigation is journalism. As journalists, the students would be protected under the Illinois Shield Law, which would give them the right not to reveal their sources and unpublished materials. Federal law also prevents the university from turning over students’ grades to the prosecution.

Lavine says that the journalism students should not be responsible for producing evidence for court. Instead, the students’ job is to produce facts for the university’s law school, which then double checks these facts before handing them over to the prosecution.

This legal battle has implications for journalism students’ pursuit of truth. Students need to know that they can be journalists without fearing that they might end up in court for completing a class assignment.

For more information:

• Prosecutors Turn Tables on Student Journalists
• University's justice project finds itself targeted

HELD BY THE TALIBAN

This post is from UW-Madison student: Will Mueller

David Rohde of the New York Times is currently releasing a five-part series entitled “Held By The Taliban” in which he provides perhaps the most in-depth account possible of a terrifying event he did not expect to live through.

Rhode’s dedication to bringing a complete story to the public led him and two Afghan journalists on a journey to interview a Taliban commander, Abu Tayyeb, where they group was kidnapped and held until their escape more than seven months later.

While Rhode’s dedication to providing a complete picture jeopardized his life, his skills as a reporter yielded a detailed account of his kidnapping which would probably be otherwise impossible to obtain from interviewing someone else in that position.

Rhode’s knowledge of Afghan culture and of the geographic layout of the region allowed him to explain to readers not only where he was throughout his captivity, but brought light to some of the inner workings of the Taliban and showed the power they truly hold in the region.

Aside from the larger picture of a military society largely believed to be one where Osama Bin Laden is hiding, Rhode brought additional details to the story from the Kalashnikov rifles the young soldiers all carried to the Barbie blanked which he was given to sleep beneath.

This is an interesting case where the journalist becomes the story and writing it from the first person perspective allows readers inside of the mind of someone in a situation most Americans have no ability to imagine. The ability to piece together a seven month story without the option to take notes truly shows why this perspective is a unique one likely impossible without Rhode’s skills and journalistic techniques.

This blog post comes from BA Klein:

I came across this article in the Detroit Free Press, "Ghost hunters stalk Detroit military base."
I think it uses an interesting strategy for a classic Halloween season story. The writer, Jeff Seidel, splits up the story between a traditional news story with information on the background, people seriously involved, and experts who research the phenomenon of an event like this. In between bits of information he talks about his personal adventure skeptically joining along on a ghost hunting mission in Detroit. He gives enough information for the reader to get a distinct background of ghost hunting, but also paints a different light for the people involved with the activity. By mentioning a lot of the proceeds for joining on this adventure help keep the historic Ft. Wayne army base used for this particular hunt in commission. Jeff also realizes, like many who will read the article, his own personal account may be just as valuable to show the reader you are not alone in thinking this is a bit insane.

Just as important as the article itself the pictures and video accompanying the article are vital to the overall presence of the article. The photos are taken in a mysterious way and the video is accompanied with interviews from paranormal investigators, strange sounds, and showing the intimidation of Ft. Wayne on it's own. The video also contributes to the myth of the Ft. Wayne barracks mentioning how many in the army went in for help, but "never came out." I thought it was a unique way of creating a piece of this nature even for this time of year.

Libel Tourism

The following is from a UW-Madison MA J-student, Erin Kapp.

When I wrote about Simon Singh's libel case, my commentary on the case included, you may have noticed, a comment that I shouldn't have to wonder if I was going to be sued in Britain. That 'I' was not rhetorical. British courts tend to take the view that their libel law can apply widely. Very widely. Like to books that weren't published in Britain.

Singh is British, so it at least makes sense that he would be sued for libel in Britain. Rachel Ehrenfeld, on the other hand, is American. She was sued by Khalid bin Mahfouz, who is Saudi Arabian. Ehrenfeld's book sold a grand total of 23 copies in Britain, via internet or special order- it was not published in Britain, to avoid exactly this situation. The first chapter was available on the internet.

That was enough for Justice David Eady to decide that British courts had enough authority to take the case. Ehrenfeld did not appear to make a defense and a default judgement was awarded against her.

Cases like Ehrenfeld's have spawned a new term: libel tourism. It refers to plaintiffs taking libel cases to foreign (particularly British) courts because of the relative ease of winning a libel claim there.

In reponse to libel tourism, California recently became the third US state to bar its courts from enforcing foreign libel judgements unless that judgement was made in a court whose free speech protections were equal to or greater than those in the US. New York, Florida, and Illinois have passed similar laws; on a nationwide basis, HR1304, is currently in the House.

While that's nice news for those of us in the US, it doesn't much help our British colleagues, or address the issues underlying libel tourism. Hopefully, the controversy stirred up by high-profile cases like Singh's and Ehrenfeld's will lead to a revision of British law, and British writers will be able to depend on truth as a defense against libel.

British Libel Law

The following was written by Erin Kapp, a UW-Madison MA student:

In the US, we're used to the idea that truth is the ultimate defense against libel. If someone wants to sue me for libel, it's up to them to prove that what I said was not true. If it was--even if they disagree--they're out of luck.

Simon Singh, a British science writer, is being sued for libel because he said that the British Chiropractor Association "happily promotes bogus treatments." The promotion he referred to included claims that chiropractic treatment can help with ear infections and asthma.

Singh recently co-authored a book analyzing the scientific evidence for various flavors of alternative medicine, including chiropractic treatment. The remainder of the article was largely information about the results of studies on the effectiveness of chiropractic manipulation and some instances in which chiropractic manipulation has seriously harmed people.

The BCA sued Singh for libel. The judge ruled that the phrase in question implied that the BCA was being dishonest. Britain's libel law puts the burden of proof on the defendent--meaning he or she has to prove that what they said was not libel. Given these conditions, it's perhaps not surprising that Singh lost.

Singh has been granted permission to appeal, but needless to say, the outcome isn't a given.

As an aspiring science writer, this case illustrates a worrying situation. Writers and scientists should be able to comment openly and honestly on scientific claims and evidence without having to be concerned that someone with the opposite view is going to sue them in Britain.

If open conversation about scientific issues is suppressed because libel law is applied so freely, as it is in Britain, that's bad news for journalists and for scientists. I—and any other writer or scientist—should be able to honestly critically evaluate science and people's treatment of science without the specter of being sued in Britain.

Jay Leno Show: Blunder or Brilliant?

This post was written by a writer publishing under the name MediaMaven:

Cultural arbiters from across the media world have been weighing in on the new Jay Leno Show of late. While Leno premiered only one month ago, critics from The New Yorker to the The New York Times have been quick to highlight the failings of Leno's new format. In a truly scathing review, The New Yorker's Nancy Franklin decries the program for poor quality, and chides NBC Universal for making one of the worst programming decisions possible--sacrificing the popular Tonight Show host for the quirkier Conan. Over at the Times, the Media Decoder blog reminds us that ratings for both programs are already in decline, as are local news broadcasts dependent upon a strong lead-in.

And yet, the woes of NBCU in the ratings are nothing new. While Jay may not keep those initial 18 million pairs of eyeballs tuned in every night, who is to say that a standard 10 p.m. drama would not have hemorrhaged viewers even faster? Due to the low cost of producing the new program, Jay's show may very easily turn a profit for the company.

Perhaps most importantly, the show has proven to be DVR-resistant, an early NBCU justification for the format. A recent article in the Hollywood trade Variety points out that as DVR use becomes more widespread, TV dramas are the most replayed. The Jay Leno Show, on the other hand, sees very little playback--which means good news for advertisers eager to have their commercials seen, not skipped.

All of which leads me to ask--was the creation of the Jay Leno Show a blunder or brilliant? I think only a full season of ratings and reviews will tell for sure.

USA Today--No Longer America's Newspaper?

This is from a writer publishing under the handle MediaMaven:

New numbers from the Audit Bureau of Circulations reveal that The Wall Street Journal has overtaken the list as the leader in the newspaper world. USA Today has fallen to second place, down 17 percent in just the last six months.

Two important industry trends account for this shift in the publishing landscape. First, Marriott hotels have changed their practice of automatically delivering USA Today to guests' rooms. Now, travelers can choose among three papers, the Journal included. According to Editor & Publisher, hotel sales of the Journal have benefited 20 percent from the policy shift.

Perhaps most reflective of today's changing media landscape, these Audit Bureau numbers also allow for the counting of paid online subscribers. While usatoday.com can be read for free, wsj.com requires a subscription to access the majority of content.

Will the success of the Journal now prompt other publications to charge for online access in an effort to boost their own subscriptions? With the newspaper business in dire straits, this may be the first step in a newly evolving business model. Of the top 25 newspapers in the nation, The Wall Street Journal was the only one to post an improvement. I have a feeling that media industries will soon look to Rupert Murdoch's model to take their own bottom lines back into the black--sooner rather than later.

Reporting on the Taliban

From a UW-Madison student, Beth Mueller:

Want to write an engaging book? Study in-depth reporting!

After reading Ahmed Rashid's Taliban: Islam, Oil and the New Great Game in Central Asia , I've come to the conclusion that anyone writing a book on current events or recent history (or however we categorize that), should study the reporting techniques Rashid uses.

Highlights:

1. Detail after detail about the personal histories of major Taliban figures. When a regime is this secretive and often difficult to understand, this kind of information is just vital for understanding. An example: Rashid talks about the common background many Taliban recruits shared as orphans in gender-segregated refugee camps, being taught an extreme Islamic fundamentalism. No wonder then, that they oppressed women as rulers.

2. Narrative storytelling. Be still my heart, this is a book about history that actually engages readers. Setting scenes and giving lots of physical descriptions really draws interest to the mounds of facts Rashid dug up.

Drawback:

1. Somebody please get this guy some subheads. In-depth reporting requires serious structuring as it stands as long-form journalism, not to mention something as long-form as a book. Rashid's work is interesting and engaging, but still hard to read because it has little structural organization, which is needed even within the loosely grouped chapters.

In all, the reporting techniques Rashid used made the story of the Taliban pop in a personal way. This book, published right before Sept. 11 and U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, certainly provides valuable information in a fantastic genre.

The Ticker Debate

By Abby Sears, UW-Madison

In an age where the attention spans of readers and viewers are relatively short, journalists are constantly searching for new ways to rope them in and maintain their interest. This New York Times article discusses a new way for cable networks to keep viewers tuned in – by keeping their tickers running during commercial breaks. For networks, they’re able to deliver the essential information viewers want to see at all times. For advertisers, however, the constant ticker could mean paying for a smaller advertising space that isn’t exclusively focused on their product or service. Does the ticker distract viewers from the advertising messages in front of them, or does it provide them with immediate access to information?

According to the article, the constant ticker might not be as bad for advertisers as one might think. For one, it keeps viewers from changing the channel during commercial breaks, which means the viewer is more likely to watch at least some of the commercial as opposed to watching something else. Having a constant ticker would force both the advertising and news industries to change somewhat. Advertisers would need to redesign their campaigns to allot for the ticker space while still drawing the viewer’s attention, and the television news industry would need to alter the use of the ticker to keep the viewer tuned in while still giving them vital information. All in all, I think the Ticker Debate reflects a popular ongoing trend in today’s media world – how can we grasp the public’s attention, maintain it and still provide them with the most up-to-date information before the competition?

By a journalism student at UW-Madison:

As industry experts continue the debate over which direction journalism will head in the future, it is good to see some news organizations being pro active and at least trying to create new approaches to make newspapers more financially viable. An AP article about the LA Times highlights how the newspaper has retooled itself. The LA Times' new model is actually one that our J401 class discussed within the last week.
The LA Times decided that it was reorganizing its newsroom into a round-the-clock operation, transforming its web edition into its breaking news center while offering expanded, analytical coverage in its print addition. According to the AP article, the print version would focus on editorials, features, investigative reporting and trend stories, while the web will offer multimedia options and up-to-the-minute information.
I personally think this is a great model for all newspapers to follow. Most newspapers simply publish the exact same information in print and online, while actually offering more multimedia and interactive material online. Why wouldn't a reader then choose to simply read online then? They get more information, and they are not missing anything they would find in print.
In order for newspapers to remain viable, they must be open to these new approaches, and they must let go of the archaic ways of the old days. It is sad to see traditional print journalism change, but print must change if it ever wants to survive. My last blog entry focused on print media finding its niche. In my opinion, this is it.
The Internet's obvious advantage is that it is instantaneous. People look to the Internet for quick snippets of information. Newspaper will never be able to compete with that. Between TV, radio, and the Internet, they have breaking news covered.
In-depth analysis, investigative pieces, and follow-ups are a perfect fit for print though. People don't want to sit and stare at a computer screen for a long time to read long stories, they want that in their hands, like a book. Newspapers were originally built to be in-depth anyway. It is time to go back to print's roots, analyze its strengths in comparison to other forms of media, and like the article says. "Break it on the web, expand on it in print."

A web of connectedness

From UW-Madison student Emily Bisek:

Check out this New York Times' series One in Eight Million. This multimedia compilation of stories from interesting and unique people throughout the city is interesting in a variety of ways, but perhaps the most intriguing element is the fact that the newsroom is pursuing such a series to begin with. This human interest series serves a very different purpose than the other sections- focusing on the human elements of everyday life, its challenges and life's little accomplishments. The use of multimedia to achieve this perspective works wonderfully, allowing viewers to hear the Jim Romano's voice, Ed Grajales' sighs and Elizabeth Cousins' laughter. The comments on every story are also very uplifting, hopeful and, to a certain extent, as inspiring as the stories themselves. For example, many readers wished Freda Degannes many blessings, wishes and prayers after viewing her miracle. The humanness of One in Eight Million permeates not only the series itself, but the attached reader comments, making for a little web of connectedness rarely seen in newspapers across the country.

Not invincible

From UW-Madison student Jacob Harris:


The article reveals the troubling news that The Times Co. is threatening to shut down the long-standing Boston Globe for financial reasons. I think it is an interesting look at how the country's economic crisis has accelerated the decline of print journalism, which began long before the meltdown. This news immediately caught my attention because of the stature of the players involved here. While dailies in smaller cities have been going under for some time now, consensus has been that the New York Times would be venerable, if not invincible. By extension, we assumed anything associated with NYT would at least be able to weather the storm. That there would always be some level of demand for widely read, in-depth, high quality news coverage seemed only natural. But with advertisers pulling back left and right and newspapers clearly no longer the most desirable market for these advertisers, The Globe is suddenly vulnerable.

This has major implications for the future of the journalistic landscape. As the article mentions, shutting down The Boston Globe would leave only The Boston Herald as a daily source of news coverage in the city. I think this is a dangerous proposition for a city so large and that the questions journalists pose and the activities they unearth might become lost. There would be less accountability for elected officials and I am not sure that that "watchdog" role is easily replaceable. I also think this could potentially accelerate the death of other newspapers throughout the country. Furthermore, even if The Globe does not die, this disturbing news will have an impact on the morale of its staff and those of other papers. It is certainly hard to do one's best work when fearful of getting the pink slip on a daily basis.

Details, details

From University of Wisconsin-Madison student Royston Sim:

Check out this link to an article about raging Mexican drug war in the NY Times. Several things made this article stand out for me. First, the writing is crisp and to the point. By the third graf, Marc Lacey strikes home the main point of the article: that there is a pervasive problem within Mexico's institutions.

The article is comprehensive -- someone without any prior knowledge about the drug war would gain a clear picture of the overall situation at present, its roots and how it has evolved. Lacey aptly employs subheads to transition from point to point, and this makes the article easy to follow and digest.

There are many voices in this story, from the soldier in the streets up to President Felipe Calderon. The article also boasts ample figures that provide context and a sense of the power struggles. For example, there were "6,200 drug-related killings in 2008, up more than 100 percent from 2007, and the more than 1,100 so far in 2009." Another nice detail: someone at Mexican customs dabbing Vicks VapoRub on the nose of a drug-sniffing dog.

Hoping for survival of quality

From University of Wisconsin-Madison student Katrina Rust:

As news media struggle to stay afloat, most are being forced to shed
staff and try new approaches for engaging readers. The MinnPost is a
yearish-old nonprofit online newspaper trying to sustain itself and a
small staff of reporters on not just foundation money, but also
memberships and advertising. Joel Kramer, former editor and publisher
of the Star Tribune in Minneapolis and founder of MinnPost, shares how
he hopes MinnPost will be a successful news model in this story.

One thing that sets MinnPost apart, besides revenue sources, is the
site has stricter moderation of comments. I know people are all
excited about how online news can be interactive and a conversation,
but often people leave obnoxious comments that defeat any attempt at a
thoughtful exchange of ideas. MinnPost commenters have to give their
full names and can’t say hateful or obscene things.

While I hadn’t heard of MinnPost before, now I’m hoping for its
survival. Kramer’s perspective gives me hope that serious, quality
news outlets may survive (and I can find a job).

Changes for Motor City

From University of Wisconsin-Madison student Beth Mueller:

The Detroit Free Press is making some interesting changes in terms of print and online content this week. Basically, the paper is limiting home delivery to Thursday, Friday and Sunday, but keeping a smaller, redesigned version of the paper copy on newsstands daily. It seems like this is an attempt to compromise tightening the belt while clinging to the print model. I also find it interesting that on the page answering readers' questions, the first thing listed is contact information for staffers themselves. It seems like they're trying everything possible to assuage readers' anxiety, personally if necessary.

The other thing I think is really interesting in all this is the new e-Edition, which is basically the print version in pdf, only with a kind of neat reader. It's available only to subscribers, but here's the link to a demo.

It's kind of fun, but seems a little silly when their regular website has all the content and is updated continuously. My guess is that this is a bone to throw daily advertisers in hopes they'll stick around and middle-aged or older readers who are used to the print layout.

State of the Media 2009

From UW-Madison student Sisi Chen:

Organized by the Pew Project For Excellence In Journalism, the annual State Of The News Media is out.

The report analyzes and organizes all of the major journalism trends for the past year. One of the report's general overviews says that 2008 saw a major change in mainstream media's news agendas. What we typically think of as hard news received less and less coverage. Two examples the report gives is how the press was late in picking up on the economic collapse and how coverage of the Iraq war all but disappeared. The report also analyzes trends in specific industries like online reporting, local TV, audio and magazines. I also really like the special reports section. This part deals with emerging trends, like citizen-based media, and feature links to specific news outlets/ site that have garnered a lot of attention.

Telling Story of Immigrants

From UW-Madison student Tze Ruey Yeoh:

Recently, I came across the article in the NY times, “A Slippery Place in the U.S. Work Force.” offering a different perspective on the worsened economy on unemployment issues in the country. Instead of all the usual talk about Americans getting laid off and dwindling work benefits, it focuses on the impact it has on immigrants, namely Hispanics. I felt the writer followed her curiosity and found a story idea that was least obvious from the general economic issue. She looked for other possibilities that will be interesting and provide a new understanding for readers.

The story showed a complication of the dilemma that Hispanics face in deciding to stay or return back to their home country by utilizing very strong quotes from real people such as Mr. Lopez and Enrique, who are determined not to leave the country for the sake of their families’ welfare. The writer illustrates the color and impressions of her sources through their emotions when speaking out about immigration issues that are often overlooked during the times of recession. She attempts to lead readers to that feeling she had during the interviews and research. The story flowed well from recounting the history of globalization and the growing immigrant population to the challenges faced in order to survive and feed their families. The use of subheads in the article helped in the transition of the piece as it provided more organization, which is essential in a longer, narrative story. It is difficult to fully structure a story on deadline, thus, I thought the writer showed an effort of highlighting the major themes and accompanying them with supporting points. Overall, the article was successful in outlining the struggles of a major population in the country that we are often unaware of and the inherent uncertainties faced by immigrants for their future. It was a well-balanced sort of reporting between being formal yet conversational that gives this story its rich texture meant to draw readers in.

Coffins and Censorship

From UW-Madison student, Alison Fox:

Recently President Obama overturned a ban against journalists being able to take photos of coffins returning from war, which was created in 1991 by President Bush Sr. I also agree with the fact that it is up to the families of the dead soldiers to decide if they want to allow photos or not. This ban has been accused of sanitizing the war by not allowing the American public to actually see the casualties of war. I think this is a great victory for journalists and freedom of the press when it comes to being able to cover the true horrors of war, without threat of censorship, and hope this trend of open communication continues.

Citizne Journalism as Agenda Setter?

From UW-Madison student Julia Shiplett:

This New York Times's article is interesting because it discusses not just the music scene at South by Southwest but how artists' success has become dependent on Internet buzz, specifically blogs.

First, the story paints a broad picture of the Austin festival then describes the risk many bands take in hopes of recognition, both live and virtual. The anecdotal profile of the Crocodiles
reflects the swift power the Internet can have but how uncertain it is to maintain.

On a deeper level, this piece shows how the Web and citizen journalism can now be the prominent agenda-setter in terms of culture and arts versus the big traditional publications with a limited news holes per section. Being online itself, this story is both self-reflective of its medium but also seems accepting that writers far outside The New York Times staff can make their voices heard.

News vs. Entertainment

From UW-Madison student Abigail Sears:

This video clip shows CNN’s Anderson Cooper giving a speech at Hofstra University in New York last week. He discusses some interesting situations he has experienced in the broadcast journalism industry.

“I’m not much for giving advice, that’s Bill O’Reilly’s job and he does it very well,” Cooper says at the beginning of the clip. I think this brings up an important aspect of the cable news industry – deciphering between what is “news” and what is “entertainment.” Competition is a huge factor in any media market, but I think broadcast journalism is especially susceptible to blurring the lines of credibility in the quest for high ratings.

Cooper talks about how he feels his duty is simply to inform viewers at home about what is going on in the world so they can decide for themselves how they feel about it – generally the same goal of news stories in newspapers or magazines. Opinion sections in print are clearly labeled and often in their own section, but opinion programs on cable news channels often feature boisterous personalities, like Bill O’Reilly, to raise the entertainment factor and gain more viewers.

A person tuning into a cable news show to see their favorite television personality can easily misinterpret the program’s content as straight news even if the show is opinion-based. While it is vital for players in the broadcast journalism industry to somehow gain and maintain viewership, often through providing entertaining anchors or hosts, I think it is important to preserve the basic journalistic principles Cooper discusses in the video clip in mind to enhance a channel’s credibility as a legitimate news source.

This Land's "Golden Nuggets"

From UW-Madison student, Emily Bisek:

This story is one of many in a New York Times series called "This Land," which takes readers into stories from obscure places around the country.

The narrative writing in this piece is especially mesmerizing. To begin with, this is a solid, great story told through the eyes of a struggling dairy farm. But, the hidden details spread throughout the text make it especially dynamic, such as the family not offering the messenger of bad news a cup of coffee. Also, the farmer's aching shoulder, the first names of his employees, the one sentence statement of worrying making him sick and an office filled with stuffed cows add personality and reality to the story. Dan Barry seems to place these "golden nuggets" of ideas and pictures, mostly told through good reporting and details, all the way to the end of the text. These details leave readers satisfied and wowed, all while telling a touching and informative tale

Ad Optimization

From UW-Madison student John Hamel:

An online advertising firm called the Rubicon Project could be the defibrillator needed to revive perishing news outlets, according to an LA Times article. The firm claims it can increase online revenue for newspapers and news organizations by an average of 60 percent through a process called ad optimization. News sites typically have a more diverse audience than current automated ad systems can target efficiently. With the Rubicon Project’s ad optimization programming, page content is paired with ads relevant to the reader demographic more effectively, creating a higher response rate and ultimately a better return on the investment for the advertiser.

Newspapers to find niche

From UW-Madison student, JOSEPH TROVATO:

The plight of the journalism industry in the digital age is a well-documented tale of decline. Recent reminders of this reality, like the closing of the Rocky Mountain News, or the possibility of losing yet another paper, the San Francisco Chronicle, show that as journalists, we obviously need to change something about the way we conduct business. This is the challenge that our generation faces.

I disagree wholeheartedly with those that would argue that newspapers will simply go extinct, even print newspapers will find their niche, and this is our challenge.

When TV hit the scene in the 1940s and 1950s, everyone believed that radio would die. Well, it didn't. In fact, radio has since flourished, and continues to flourish. The Internet is to print newspapers, what T.V. was to radio. Sure, radio was forced to change, but it did, and it survived.

So too can print.

In my opinion, if print media does not adapt, then yes, it will go extinct, but we, as future journalists must analyze the strengths of newspapers as opposed to online media in order to find a niche. Does that mean charging for Internet subscriptions to newspapers? Does it mean increasing advertising on web sites in order to subsidize print? Perhaps, but I don't think that is the only answer. That is still up for debate.

Personally I think that in-depth more magazine-like pieces will be the saving grace of print. People don't like to sit on their computers and stare at the same story for a long time, they'd rather have that type of story in their hands. Newspapers originally were more in-depth anyway.

The short snippet stories are a more recent phenomenon. The advantage of the Internet is its ability to cover breaking news instantaneously, and up-to-date information. I think newspapers will be saved by thorough thought/debate-provoking analysis of those hard news breaking stories. Newspapers might do big follow-up stories or analytical pieces.

But this, of course, is only the beginning of the debate that we must have to ensure the survival of print and newspapers.

Twitter as Journaism?

From UW-Madison student Andrew Koritz:

I found this article on MSNBC which discusses the recent surge in Twittering and how useful of a tool it is.

Personally, I feel that twitter is something that can add to the journalism industry if used in a proper way. Originally I was skeptical, but the more I think about it, the more I see how useful it could be. As the author of the piece alludes to, some of the twittering "stories" recently are non-issues such as Shaq twittering about hanging out at the mall, but I think we need to expand on our ideas of what this medium can provide.

At President Obama's address to the nation a few weeks ago, some of the politicans with a front row seat twittered notes about the presentation and cleared up facts that Obama may have exaggerated or misspoken. I think this tool, when refined, can be used as an up to the minute tool to clarify any mistakes in journalistic accuracy.

Furthermore, by choosing to follow certain causes or people on twitter, it allows for people to educate themselves further on prevalent issues and allows for new avenues for journalists to set the agenda on items in the news without writing formal columns in magazines and newspapers.