J 201 - Section 303

How Many Colberts Are There? Report

2012-03-13T10:15:00.002-05:00

In How Many StephenColberts Are There?, by CharlesMcGrath, the amount of influence that satirical comedian Stephen Colbert hashad beyond his show (Cobert Report) is portrayed and explored. McGrath mentionshow he isn’t just a character on a TV show. He is also interacting in the realworld as his character, particularly by using his Super PAC. The article alsoexplores Stephen Colbert’s career history, including some of his awkwardbeginning moments, such as his speech at the White House Correspondents’ Dinnerin 2006. This article derives its importance (awareness of Super PACs) from themedium of publication and the impact Colbert has had on eventsin the United States.

One of the primary concerns of how Colbert is “interactingin the real world” is represented by a running gag on the show, the ColbertSuper PAC, which is intended to be humorous, yet is actually completely real anddangerous in a political environment. McGrath explores Colbert’s career path up until now toillustrate how his interference in real life events is a new phenomenon for Colbert’scharacter. The Colbert Report was originally started as a “joke” in 2003, buteven by 2006 at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, people didn’t quite comprehendhis comedic aims. In contrast, 6 years later, Colbert enjoys tremendouspopularity and has a Super PAC that can raise an unlimited sum of money fromcorporations. This money can be spent on whatever the user wants, which is usually political events. Colbert explains thathis Super PAC is used for comedic ends, such as changing the name of the SouthCarolina primary to “The Stephen Colbert Super PAC South Carolina Primary.”Beyond his intentions, it also raises awareness of how easy it is to utilizethe real Super PACs, which were only just established in 2010. By January 2012, groups had already used millions of dollars from Super PACs in orderto support different candidates. This article is likely part of the response tothese expenditures. Although they cannot officially be affiliated with anycandidate, the Super PACs can definitely have an influence on politics andelections. This article reveals how easy it can be for a group to use a SuperPAC. In the case of Colbert, he is using it for harmless entertainment, but hisactions show how potentially dangerous they are in politics.

This article was published in January 2012 in New York Timesonline; the fact that the New York Times published it shows its significance.The New York Times has been around for over 150 years and is read by millionsof people every day, including 30 million monthly online viewers. The New York Times is generallyaccepted as a reputable news source. Judging from an article published theprevious day by Ruth Marcus, Super PACs aren’t a new topic for the Times. Thisis significant because the New York Times might be educating its readers andgetting them to question the extent of power Super PACs have.

Charles McGrath is an editor and writer for the New YorkTimes and he has worked for the Times for over 25 years. He also has a fewbooks published and also contributes to the New York Times’ magazine as well asother publications like “Golf Digest.” Since he has been around for so long andpublished hundreds, if not thousands of articles, it is safe to assume he is aquality reporter that is dedicated to getting the story out. Although it is notenough to establish the article’s importance just based on the mode ofpublication, having a credible source certainly helps boost the significance ofthe impact of the article.

Through the assistance of this article and Stephen Colbert’ssatire, it’s possible for the American people to become aware of what theseSuper PACs are capable of. Fortunately, this article fits in nicely with the currentpolitical atmosphere and the actions of Colbert. Regardless of the statedintentions of the Colbert Super PAC, this article about his Super PAC isconveniently part of a series of journalistic stories and editorials by the NewYork Times that raises awareness of these Super PACs.

Discussion Questions for Press Politics:

2012-03-12T17:58:00.001-05:00

1. From what you read does this article seem to bebiased towards one end of the political spectrum? If not, why didn’t it, and ifit did is that because it heavily critiques the Bush administration?

2. Do you think that the authors motive was more tocritique journalists for not writing articles that disagreed with governmentpolicy or to criticize editors for not allowing the articles to be published?Was the semi-censoring of articles to maintain an economically sound newspaper,or for fear of criticism from the government?

3. On pages 21-22 of the article the authorsdiscuss results of an insufficiently inquisitive press in terms of government.What do you think of these three ideas? Are these results true for allsituations? Does the public really need the full truth?

4. On page 33 the authors say that the big questionis why the press limits themselves to a set of rules making it difficult toreport and sustain articles that oppose government power. What are some othersituations where the press has done this, and why does it still do this?

5. Does the censorship power that the governmenthas directly violate democracy? Why or why not?

Discussion Questions for Colbert Article

2012-03-12T11:01:00.002-05:00

1. The article mentions that Stephen Colbert briefly ran for president in 2010. Colbert made sure to inform both Republicans and Democrats that it was satirical and an extension of the show. What is the significance that members of both parties were agreeing with him and willing to support his campaign?

2. How do you feel about Colbert's "hobbyhorse", are corporations people or are only individuals people, people?

3. Do you think that Colbert is a journalist? If he is, what form of journalism does he fall under? Why is what he and his team do important for the American perspective on other media sources?

4. When Colbert was asked to speak at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2006, little research was done what type of speaker he would be, leading to an awkward situation for President Bush and Colbert. What do you feel are the appropriate consequences for not checking sources? How does this example fall under the "discipline of verification"?

5. In lecture 3/12 Professor Wells asks us to be critical of how the press covers political parties and politicians. Should journalists be able to convey their opinion when they cover a political story? Do you think that there are times it is appropriate, such as the Colbert Report and the Daily Show, and times when opinions are not appropriate?

Research Report: When The Press Fails

2012-03-11T23:43:00.000-05:00

When The Press Fails Political Power and the News Media from Iraq to Katrina, Bennett and his coauthors criticize the press during the Iraq war. The authors claim that the press during this time was heavily one-sided, giving the public only part of the truth behind Bush’s decision to enter the war. The press relied on and was strongly influenced by government officials. The authors state, “it is important to recognize that what carries a story is not necessarily its truth or importance, but whether it is driven by dominant officials within institutional decision making arenas” (29). The press relied on the governmental officials as a source, making democratic voices scared of negative feedback from the media and the public. The media was taken over by these officials, allowing for the creation of a false reality through manipulation and a failure to challenge the news. The article shows how severally influenced and manipulated the press was during the Iraq war to Hurricane Katrina.

This piece is from the first chapter, Press Politics in America The Case of the Iraq War, in, When The Press Fails which was published in 2007 by the University of Chicago Press. The three coauthors W. Lance Bennett, Regina G. Lawrence, and Steven Livingston analyze the relationship between governmental politics and the press. Their main purpose in writing this book was to help society understand and interpret the role press and news sources play on democracy in America. People rely on the press to relay reliable information about governmental happenings, thus media should be independent from politics and biases.

After having done some research, I found that all three of the authors were connected through The University of Washington. Both Regina G. Lawrence and Steven Livingston attended University of Washington and both earned a Ph.D in political science. Bennett attended Yale University and also earned his Ph.D in political science in 1974. He is a professor at University of Washington teaching Political Science and is also the founder and director of Center for Communication and Civic Engagement. All three are professors of political science and have much background in different aspects of political science. Regina G. Lawrence has specific interest within women and politics, but has also written many articles analyzing high profile events and policy issues with American Democracy. Steven Livingston specializes in media and politics, but also is skilled with technology’s role in foreign and military policy making and also with terrorism and media. Bennett focus mainly on the relationship between press and government and also has a large focus on youth engagement within democracy.

After having done the research, I believe that this book was meant to engage average American citizens, especially younger generations such as college students since Bennett aims at the engagement of the youth. Many reviewers described the book to be extremely informative however a tad dry throughout and depressing. This chapter from the book provides an insight into the relationship between press and democracy focusing on the Iraq war. They have expertise within the field of media and political science, and having three coauthors with different backgrounds within the field allows for a broader range of ideas and knowledge. This gives a greater credibility for the information, but leaves little room for interpretation. Audiences are able to gain insightful knowledge and have a greater understanding of the relationship between press and politics through the authors mass of knowledge in the field of political science.

Research Report: The Weekly Warrior

2012-03-06T10:18:00.000-06:00

Research Report: The Weekly Warrior

NicholasLemann’s piece, “The Weekly Warrior”, was published on November 27^th,2006, in the Wayward Press, a column in TheNew Yorker. The selection gives a brief overview of the lasting effectsI.F. Stone left the world of investigative journalism with, referring to it asa ‘problematic crusade’. Stone was revered for his work ethic and communicativeskills, and is quoted several times in the reading in order to demonstrate theflow of his conversation. While his contributions to journalism merited thepublishing of four seperate books dedicated to Stone’s life, he often workedindependently of the government and the greater portion of the journalisticcommunity. Lemann does an excellent job of remaining unbiased in his piece, ashe holds nothing back, and doesn’t fail to include Stone’s apparent affiliationwith (or sympathy for) communist Russia during the Cold War.

Thepiece’s author, Nicholas Lemann, was raised and educated in New Orleans. Hebegan his career as a journalist at age seventeen for an alternative weeklynewspaper, which marked the beginning of the construction of an impressiveresumé. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard in 1976 with a concentrationin American History and Literature. After his education, he held positions atseveral newspapers and magazines, including The Washington Monthly, theWashington Post, and The New Yorker. In 2003, he was hired as the Dean of theGraduate School of Journalism at Columbia University, while continuing tocontribute to The New Yorker. He has published five books, one which led to asignificant revision of the SAT, and has done work on television for stationsincluding BBC and the Discovery Channel.

Ifind Lemann to be extremely credible as his level of education and experiencein the field of journalism are both more than adequate to compose his piece on I.F.Stone. I feel very comfortable trusting the information in “The Weekly Warrior”as true and unbiased. Though the article was published in The New Yorker and mentioned several authors by name, I couldn’tcome up with any reviews or responses.

Resources:

http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/profile/50-nicholas-lemann/10

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/nicholas_lemann/search?contributorName=nicholas%20lemann

Journalism of Verification Research Report

2012-03-06T09:00:00.000-06:00

Journalism of Verification is thefourth chapter of Bill Kovach’s and Tom Rosentiel’s book, Elements of Journalism: What NewspeopleShould Know and the Public Should Expect. Elements of Journalism wasoriginally published in 2001, and six years later the 2^nd editionwas released. Kovach and Rosentiel decided to write this book in response tothe mass’ continuing distrust of the news. The authors found that journalistswere increasingly forgetting, misusing, or abusing their duty to report thefacts to the public.

Thebook began at a conference of 25 influential journalists from all acrossAmerica. These 25 individuals were also known as Committee of ConcernedJournalists (CCJ). These journalists hoped to find out exactly how the news hadbecome so untrustworthy and how to remedy the situation. For three years thejournalists analyzed data from surveys, interviews, and other sources in orderto establish the journalism’s core responsibilities and principles. The responsibilitywas then given to Kovach and Rosentiel to create a book that would lie out theexpectations for journalists, in the hopes of increasing journalism quality.

As for the authors, both are wellrespected and seasoned in the field of journalism. Bill Kovach actually co-foundedthe CCJ and has been involved in journalism for more than 50 years. In the pasthalf century (wow!) Kovach has worked as a reporter for the NashvilleTennessean, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and New York Times (former Washingtonbureau chief) as well as worked for both Harvard and Stanford University.Kovach has also received an honorary doctorate degree from two separatecolleges as well as earned the Elijah Parish Lovejoy Award.

While not having the same totalyears of experience as Kovach, Tom Rosentiel nonetheless has spent the last 30years as a journalist. In the past he has worked for the Los Angeles Times andfor Newsweek (chief congressional correspondent). Rosentiel co-founded CCJ andhe currently is the director of the organization he founded, Project for Excellencein Journalism (PEJ).

Kovach’s and Rosentiel’s aim with this book, andparticularly this chapter was to help every day news consumers to understandthe misconceptions of journalistic practices and how those errors can becorrected. Based on the comments and reviews of this book I think their messagewas much appreciated. Of all the reviews I found, I thought William Safire(from NY Times) best summed up the importance of the book, "Don’t eventhink of becoming a reporter, editor, columnist or influential blogger withoutreading this modern classic."

Based on my research, I find it clear that the authors wrote this bookfor the average American in the hopes of restoring their faith in journalism.The authors want to put stricter expectations onto journalists to ensure thatthey are fulfilling their duty of properly informing the citizens. Kovach wasquoted as saying, “Journalismis the closest thing I have to a religion, I believe deeply in the role andresponsibility the journalists have to the people of a self-governingcommunity.” With that statement, as well as the knowledge that the authors havea combined journalism experience of over 80 years, it is hard to believe thatKovach and Rosentiel are sincere and truthful in their presentation.

Discussion Questions for The Weekly Warrior

2012-03-05T22:45:00.002-06:00

With people like I.F. Stone and Marin Luther being so well remembered and still talked about today after challenging authorities like the government and church, why do most journalists act as cheerleaders for those authorities even when they question what is being reported as "truth"?

Is it possible to produce a good news story if you are closely affiliated with or share similar views as the subjects of your story? (is it possible to eliminate bias)

When you get your news do you generally accept everything as "truth" or do you ever question whether or not what you're being told is in fact true?

What makes you accept a story as truth or what makes you question it?

How would you define accountability news?

Do you think we could ever reach a point where the amount of accountability news gets so low that society completely rejects the need to watch TV news or read newspapers? (downward spiral)

Online Assignment 2-Missy Heck

2012-03-02T19:52:00.002-06:00

1. How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?
Journalists were faced with the pressure from their community to present the facts in the most patriotic way possible. In a time such as 9/11, the community looked for ways to support each other, and by presenting anything Anti-American, journalists were criticized for not being patriotic. As Bill Moyers put it, anytime someone said anything against America, "The patriot police came knocking."

2. Where they failed, why did they do so?

Journalists felt the need to show patritism toward the United States, and were unable to criticize the Bush Administration without being called "Anti-American" or "unpatriotic." They would let their emotions get in the way of reporting the actual truth, even if the truth wasn't what America wanted to hear.

3. What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?
News organizations felt pressure to appear pro-American. If they did speak out, they would be severely criticized. As Bill O'Reilly had said, "Anyone who hurts this country in a time like this. Well let's just say you will be spotlighted." Also, they felt pressure to cover up what was happening in Afghanistan. For example, the newspaper in Florida that had shown photos of civilian casualties was receiving hundreds of threats of unhappy readers. The newspapers fell victim to pleasing their readers.

4. How did different kinds of news outlets cover the issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?
The New York Times reported a story that had confirmed the claims the Bush Adminisration had been making. They had not been as skeptical as they should have in reviewing and following up on sources before printing a story. Many other large newspapers did not follow up on what the government was saying, and simply published stories without significant evidence.

2012-03-02T16:12:00.001-06:00

1) How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?

TThe majority of media outlets were pressured by outside sources to refrain from challenging the patriotism that presented itself to society after the events of September 11th. Big people in corporations went as far as to call cable networks "un-American" when they displayed shots of citizen casualties in Afghanistan. Likewise, newspapers were told not to put pictures of these casualties on pages 1A of their papers. As for the link between Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction, everyone just assumed this was true because it was what the White House was telling them was true. We had an administration that was marketing their policy in a major way because these neo-conservatives always wanted to remove Hussein and they used the media as a platform to do so. Even NBC's Washington bureau chief claims to not have had access to the correct sources to prove this theory false, which is highly questionable. People were not skeptical of defectors and to be a good reporter one must be skeptical. However, there were a select few, like those who wrote for the Knight Rider newspapers that led with big articles, such as "No Threat in Iraq." Unfortunately, many of these sources went unnoticed and were overpowered by mainstream media.

2) Where they failed, why did they do so?

They failed because they feared being called disloyal if they were ever critical to the Bush Administration. By allowing their emotions to get in the way of their jobs, they only further aided the war by way of omission. They bought what was being told to them and went as far as to continue to sell what had been presented to them. Those who did ever challenge the information relayed to them was often overlooked because of mainstream sources like the NY Times and other more popular papers and magazines.

3) What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?

After September 11th, the government and how people acted towards it was a very sensitive subject. They were told to feel bad about the situation and not blame the administration for the losses of many. The "patriotism police" as they were called, were very quick to shoot down anyone in face ridicule, thus making for a very partisan ruling press. What the White House was presenting was to be taken as fact and they were only giving out information that would make them look good and appear less evil even though they were trying to rationalize absurd cases.

4) How did different kinds of news outlets cover the issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

FFor the most part, many of the news sources reported what aligned with what the government was saying. Especially the sources closest to the capital, i.e. Washington Press Corp., more than others would write in accordance with what was being told. This was because those who traveled with the government never got to see first-hand what was going on in the Middle East, they only saw what they wanted to see because of their limitation within a bubble of security. In contrast, those who had reporters in the action were able to dispute some of what the government was saying in order to report more accurate news. They had more access to direct sources. The Knight Riders, in particular, were the ones to question the facts presented to them and dig deeper as a means to come up with more information or information that proved these "facts" false. They said they picked up their phones and got to the bottom of things, they didn't sit around and wait for the news to come to them. Others simply took what was in the NY Times and used it as their main resource. Cable TV networks and big magazines like Vanity Fair brought in defectors from terrorist training camps and gave them a platform to speak even though they were giving out false information. What was particularly misleading was different articles giving the same person different positions as a means to try and solidify their facts with higher ranks. People weren't skeptical towards these defectors and let them continue filling our heads with false information. Additionally, different stations gave different spins on their stories depending on whether they were more liberal or conservative. All in all it was a collective failure of the media to present the facts fairly to the public.

2012-03-02T15:46:00.001-06:00

Discussion Questions for "Journalism of Verification"

1. In the reading, objectivity is referred to as an "illusion". If this is true, how can journalists present a story honestly without losing the story's purpose?

2. The growth of social media has increased the amount of sources available, but we also lose accuracy as well. How do journalists proceed with this important, but often misused source? Should it ever be used?

3. How should news organizations balance originality with accuracy? If they are driven by profit, how should organizations proceed with creating stories people want to read while staying true to the facts?

4. With a faster news cycle, do you think the editing techniques presented in the reading take too long? Is this process worth while?

Online Assignment 2

2012-03-02T14:38:00.002-06:00

1. How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the 'facts'?

The community as a whole did a fairly miserable job to uphold their integrity as journalists. The 'facts' weren't challenged and confirmed through investigation while they blindly followed some sources. Journalists have a duty to be skeptical. One such example of this failed responsibility is press conference with President Bush that was scripted. Only certain reporters were allowed to ask questions that were confirmed ahead of the interview by his staff.

2. Where they failed, why did they do so?

The journalists allowed emotions to get in the way of their jobs, which is to report the "truth" no matter how they feel about it. They neglected to question information they were receiving from sources after 9/11 because it fit in with the rising patriotism and made for great, interesting stories (but bad news). Much of the information reporters obtained about Iraq was incorrect, but they accepted the stories as true because well-known figures (like defectors from Iraq) told them it was true.

3. What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?

With a greater sense of national pride, those journalists and reporters that questioned the war and the direction of America were overwhelmed by those that agreed with the Bush administration. These organizations were hardly tolerated, so most journalists were pressured into catering to this push in American pride in order to not seem "Un-American." Some news organizations, like Fox News, even went so far as to publicly criticize any organization that offered some sort of criticism of the war. Some people were more private and threatened journalists/organizations with "unpatriotic views" through emails (such as reporting killing of civilians in Afghanistan/Iraq).

4. How did different kinds of news outlets cover news differently? What was the difference?

Unfortunately, most news outlets covered the news the way the administration wanted them to. Most larger organizations did not question the idea that the administration was trying to connect Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda to the 9/11 attacks. Even the extremely popular and influential "New York Times" conformed to this view and did not question the facts. This allowed the people that were feeding the information to these news organizations to freely use that information and treat it as a "fact." Many of these officials were quoting information from the paper that they had created in the first place. The first people to question the administration's intentions were involved in much smaller and less influential news organizations. They hardly held any control over the news, so by the time they actually explored the facts, the general public already believed the larger organizations.

Online Assignment #2

2012-03-02T13:50:00.000-06:00

1. How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the "facts?"
While Knight-Ridder was making an effort to uncover the truth, many of the media were not presenting events as they happened. After the shock of 9/11, journalists were affected personally by the events and many let that sway their reporting; Dan Rather proclaimed that he would line up wherever President Bush wanted him to. But when our forces invaded Afghanistan, civilian deaths were a reality and the press was pushing them out of the picture. There were also journalistic arguments to strike preemptively against Iraq, citing 9/11 as something Iraq was involved in so the public would support it. Journalists who had been to Iraq didn't understand why Saddam would collaborate with Islams over 9/11. Investigators searched for a link between the Al-Qaeda and Saddam in Prague, where the supposedly met, but nothing was found, but that wasn't front page news because people were wrapped up in the ideas spun up about WMDs.

2. Where they failed, why did they do so?
Journalists started taking sides and writing that way instead of being impartial and simply explaining what was happening. The press began pushing for war by stretching what was not hard evidence (like the link between Al-Qaeda and Saddam) to make a case for invading Iraq, which was what the government wanted to do. Journalists were also doing a poor job of keeping each other in check. There was one reporter from the documentary who admitted that he questioned CBS's stories, but he didn't go to them and request they dig deeper even though he thought they should have. Not only were they not presenting facts, but the fiction in the media was not being examined. The press and government became linked--similarities between the two rose. The media would support what seemed patriotic.

3. What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?
There were pressures to feel bad about what had happened, to be patriotic and uncritical of the government after the tragedy. Advertisers that bought space in the daily papers were claiming controversial stories were "un-American" and didn't want what was going on in Afghanistan published.

4. How did different kinds of news outlets cover the issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?
Few papers/publishers (like Knight Ridder) were pointing out that the administration was stretching what they said was evidence about Saddam. A quote I liked from one of the Knight Ridder reporters said, "...[the war] deserves the most careful scrutiny we can give it." If we were going to send our citizens to fight and die, we should have been overly critical of every piece of evidence instead of being swayed by the press who were swayed by the government.
TV media read the New York Times in the morning and their broadcasts at night would present the same story with whatever spin the events of the day put on it. Newspapers were being more skeptical than most TV programs, except for the high circulation papers that wanted to sell more copies. TV programs featured interviews with anyone who said they had information about Saddam, while some newspapers were presenting their findings for or against the war effort, whatever they found to be true. The difference between TV and print is that TV is about aesthetics and viewership, and the print is about getting the news out first thing in the morning and instead of worrying about lighting or make up, presenting the facts as they become available. TV viewers want a show, while people reading the paper might just read a snippet of a story with a promise of more information to come, instead of speculations on the subject.

Online Assignment 2

2012-03-02T13:39:00.005-06:00

1. The journalistic community, whether it was their fault or not, did not appear to present the facts very well. As mentioned in the guest lecture today (Friday 3/2), a journalist should not just trust whatever higher authorities say, because they may be trying to mislead someone for their own benefit. Also, in some cases. it seemed like some of the journalists did not do the best job of remaining objective in reporting the stories, and let pride in their country get in the way so as to not look like they were anti-America.

2. News sources seemed to receive a lot of information from a lot of different places. The documentary made it sound as if the government was trying to mislead news sources so as to make the U.S look good in making what were sub-par decisions. There are two sides to every story, and I don't know enough about the topic to say whether or not the government would have their own side to the story defending the stance they took, but as I mentioned before, it seemed like some of the news sources didn't do the best job of making sure that they information they received was factual.

3. News organizations received pressure from the government and other forms of media. The government gave out information that would make them look good, as a method of saving face and rationalizing their actions. Also, however, when some journalists finally did more digging into the stories that they were getting and found some of the stories to be false or not make sense, larger news sources such as the NY times or cable tv networks were going on air with stories that made the U.S government look good, and because the readership and viewership for those sources was larger than the company that did more research, the true story (or true as according to the documentary) was eclipsed in a way by the stories circulated by the larger companies.

4. Larger newspapers such as the NY Times and some newspapers in Washington, D.C covered the stories by taking the statements that the government made and putting them into their papers, no questions asked. Knight Ridder reporters dug up more information and asked more questions, and they tried to refute some of the information being put out in the bigger papers, but it seemed to be to little or no avail. Cable networks were taking the fake refugees and fake former Iraqi army officers and putting them on the air and interviewing them, which almost came off like a form of propaganda created to build support toward the U.S army. The only big difference was that Knight Ridder reporters realized that some stories didn't add up and decided to do more research, while the other companies just took what they were given by the government and put it in their papers or on their tv shows.

Online Assignment Two: Buying the War

2012-03-02T11:45:00.002-06:00

1) How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?

The journalistic community did not live up to presenting all of the facts of the situation. Journalists were consumed with patriotism and presenting what the government wanted them to present. While there may have been journalist who were skeptical about the administration and the facts they were told, many journalists did little to look into the speculations and rather kept to themselves and did not question the administration. Though did they present solely the facts they were given from press conferences and the administration, they did not look into what was said or what was being done and question what was being done. Journalists went against what their jobs The news sources reported deaths and all the negative associations with the war, however they did not look into if Saddam Hussein was really involved in the attacks. Journalists reported stories that favored the government and its decisions to avoid being unpatriotic. Journalists are supposed to be skeptical, however there was little skepticism within the news sources.

2) Where they failed, why did they do so?

Journalists failed to be skeptical and dig into the stories fully. Many journalists let their role of patriotism take over their reports, showing little variation in the viewpoints of the news that was happening over the issue. They also would check with other sources but in reality the only checking of the stories they did was with the White House who would say whether they could report on that story or not. Also reporters listened only to the administration about Saddam Hussain being the target for war because he was the cause of 9/11 however, reporters in the Middle East were outside of the patriotic bubble of journalism and were able to get the real truth. However, journalists in America did not listen to those journalists overseas, and also did not report on the stories in fear of being unpatriotic.

3) What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?

News organizations faced pressures from all different perspectives. The biggest pressure they received was from the government, where the government set boundaries on what journalist could write and what they could not report. Also, the government scripted press conference with President Bush showed that there really was no random questioning and rather the reporters knew when they were going to be called on, and were told to ask specific questions so that he had the specific answer already on his script. Another small pressure they faced was from advertising agencies who would discontinue support if their stories were unpatriotic. Lastly, news sources faced pressures from other networks such as when FOX criticized CNN for being unpatriotic for reporting causalities and being slightly skeptical of the government.

4) How did different kinds of news outlets cover the issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

As a whole, many news sources were in agreement with the war and going after Saddam Hussain. Both conservative and liberal newspapers justified what the Bush Administration was doing in regards to the war. Certain television news sources however were sometimes critical of other news stations such as FOX criticizing CNN for reporting on civilian casualties. Many of the news sources on television did differ in support with the war, however were then threatened with doing so and could no longer broadcast the stories. Also the news outlets just outside of Washington, D.C , the beltway, played a significant role in reporting. Being closer to the capital, they tended to agree with the administration. However, smaller news sources such as The Knight Ridder News Service, tried hard to undercover the true facts and report on their findings; these reports were hardly heard since they were so small in size as compared to larger newspapers.

Online Assignment #2

2012-03-02T11:19:00.000-06:00

1) How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the facts?

Journalists had a difficult time living up to their responsibilities to present the facts during this time period, as much of the community was concerned with becoming the best journalist for their country. This led to the effort of many journalists to support the Bush Administration and their actions, and angling their reports in the most nationalistic fashion possible. Any efforts to go against the grain were drowned out, or considered unpatriotic.

2/3) Where they failed, why did they do so? 3) What kinds of pressures did the news organizations face?

The events of 9/11 created an overwhelming wave of nationalistic emotion that swept through America. This led to an immense amount of pressure for domestic news organizations to support the Bush Administration. The press reported the stories that the government thought appropriate, and therefore lost some credibility. For example, when showing figures of casualties, the press was instructed to balance these figures with images of 9/11 to serve as a reminder of why the soldiers went in the first place. In another case, during one of President Bush's addresses, a list of reporters was provided for him to call on during the question and answer portion of the session. These reporters tossed him softball questions that led to answers that either perpetuated the sense of nationalism, or supported his Administration's decisions. The community therefore failed to serve as unbiased media in order to promote the Bush Administration's messages.

4) How did different kinds of news outlets cover their issues differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

Although patriotism isn't a bad thing in itself, the amount of press that was absorbed with it severely cut down on the number of stories coming from American reporters abroad. In some cases, connections between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein were made by domestic reporters much to the surprise of reporters stationed in Iraq. They had a much clearer view of the relations in Iraq, and were taken aback by the absurdity of the connection, as Hussein sought ultimate control, and would have never trusted a violent radical wildcard in his country. Despite their sharper view, their voices were rarely heard. Many domestic journalists struggled to find the connection between Hussein and Al Qaeda as well, so they strengthened their arguments with warnings of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and continually repeated Iraq and Al Qaeda together in reports to enforce the affiliation.

Online Assignment #2

2012-03-01T23:49:00.000-06:00

1) How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the facts?

It's clear that the journalistic community failed to present the 'facts' to the public. Just about everything being reported was in line with what the government and Bush administration was saying. The example of President Bush's press conference where he was given a script of reporters to call on in a certain order shows that what was being reported to the general public was fabricated and meant to be interpreted in a certain way. As a democracy we are supposed to have a press system that is free from government control. In that aspect, our journalistic community failed us.

2) Where they failed, why did they do so?

They failed because at the time the public was displaying a great deal of nationalism and our press began to print only pro American news. The documentary said that reporters started wearing little American flag pins when they were in front of the cameras. Journalists are Americans too and they might have been biased in their reporting. Journalists failed because instead of seeking out and really analyzing the 'facts' from the resources they had, they also took everything that the Bush administration was reporting as fact. People stationed over in the Middle East were more aware of what was really going on and knew that what was being reported in the U.S. wasn't true.

3) What kinds of pressures did the news organizations face?

News organizations faced a great deal of pressure to report news that was pro American and in line with the overwhelming patriotism after 9/11. Any news organization going against the government and reporting news that might have seemed unpatriotic would have definitely been in the minority. Organizations were pressured to not focus too much on civilian casualties in Afghanistan because whenever they did, they received threatening email responses. The government used the strong pressure from the patriotic public as a way to sell the war.

4) How did different kinds of news outlets cover their issues differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

The big difference was that new outlets closest to the Washington D.C. area tended to report news in line with what the government was saying. Also news organizations that had people stationed over in the Middle East had better access to direct sources. Personally I find it much easier to accept something as 'fact' if I see it take place myself, or hear about it from someone who I can be sure was there when it happened. I think this same aspect can be applied to this situation. The New York Times reported things like Kurds being allowed into Saddam Hussein's top secret areas, and Hussein having a Nuclear Weapon site right under his residence, that immediately shot up red flags. Some news outlets interviewed defectors about Iraqi terrorist training camps, and when they heard the same stories from the Bush administration, it created the illusion of two separate sources but in reality the government was getting their information from the same source.

Elliot Parens, online assignment No. 2

2012-03-01T22:21:00.000-06:00

1. How well did the journalistic community live upto its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?

For the most partthe journalistic community failed to report the ‘facts’. The news at the timewas in almost complete accordance with the government’s decisions and ideas,both that Al Qaeda was connected with Saddam Hussein, and also that Saddam wasa direct threat to US security and was building nuclear weapons. Voices thatcalled out the press on the misinformation were for the most part ignored, andthe US continued in a patriotic spiral.

2. Where they failed, Why did they do so?

Many newspapersand periodicals decided to be very pro American and print what the bush administrationhad fed the public instead of going out and finding experts that would know theactual ‘facts’. Whether or not peoplewere afraid to print facts or afraid to go find the facts, the ‘facts’ did notwind up where people would be able to read them. To add to this, the national turmoil resultedin a higher demand for patriotic papers and articles which discouragedjournalists from writing articles that would suggest that the government waswrong.

3. What kinds of pressures did the newsorganizations face?

The newsorganizations faced a lot of pressure both from the general population, in otherwords the consumers. Since newspapers would face serious criticism if theycriticized the government and current policies it was simply easier just to goalong with what they were saying. On top of this demand at the time was for avery narrow area of extreme patriotic journalism, which meant that if writersat the time did not try to create news for the current audience they would notmake any money at all. It was just easier in every way to go along with whatthe government was saying.

4. How did different kinds of news outlets coverthe issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

There was acertain amount of geographic discrepancy in the news coverage. News sourcesstationed near Washington DC were more likely to report the news in completeaccordance with what the government was saying as to not cause an uproar in thecapital. Also differently biased news sources covered different areas. CNN, amore liberal news source showed destruction in Afghanistan and was criticizedfor being un-American and going against the grain, while FOX news, a stationrenowned for being hugely conservative was decidedly for whatever the Bush administrationdecided to do, supporting wholeheartedly the plan to go after SaddamHussein. There was a huge difference inthe reporting on the goings on in the middle east from differently biased newsstations.

Online Assignment 2 __Si Miao

2012-03-01T18:57:00.000-06:00

1) How well did the journalistic community live upto its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?

First of all, in my opinion, the facts we have known will always have to have quotation marks around it. The journalists who collected the facts might have good evidence presenting the reality, like Bob Simon and others who were able to be in the exact place to make observation.. But the sources they gained would be so twisted by agencies that have the means to publish the information and inform the public. The 'facts' were not even exposed to many before even getting presented to the world.
The journalistic community was supposed to present the 'facts' that might contrast to official 'facts' and 'facts' welcomed by the public. Government agencies and commercialized media have done a good job in presenting what they want to present. The facts that might be so critical yet true at the end are never liked at the moment, but that does not mean they are not needed. However after 9-11, it seems no one dared standing out. It might be understandable, but pitiful.

2) Where they failed, why did they do so?

Obviously the journalist community failed because they decided not to confront patriotism. A united act and attitude of the public is very powerful and hard to go against. Meanwhile, the journalists themselves are citizens of this country. It's not their fault if they also feel the strong desire to help serve the country. Under a circumstance like 9-11, nobody could possibly stay away from the traumatic impact.

3) What kinds of pressures did news organizationsface?

Clearly the news organization faced pressure from the commercial sectors. News channels could not be really critical toward the policies because it would incur negative feedback from the audience. The audience are predominantly patriotic, which in itself is nothing wrong but reasonable and natural. However if the press wanted to go against such nation-wide sentimental movement, the audience would not like it. Then the people putting money on advertisements on that channel would not like it. The people owning the media companies would not like it either. The pressure largely depends on that fact that whether the media was in line with the people, and the people, at that moment, were in line with the President. Therefore criticism would not only be seen as unpatriotic by the public and also be attacked by competitors. But after all the fundamental issue is whether the media has this courage to go against both the government and the mainstream voices in order to scrutinize ongoing events.

4) How did different kinds of news outlets coverthe issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?
Some other newspaper which serve the audience outside of Washington DC and New York held a different attitude toward the war policy. They scrutinized the sources and policies more because they felt the responsibility for those who got sent to the war. Also there were journalists who had close contacts with people in Middle East and knew that the links between Saddam and Al Qaeda were false. For the official line, the false sources got sent to both news agencies and government units at the same time, creating the misleading perception that all the sources happened to confirm a 'truth'. Therefore there were differences between various agencies. However those who were more critical toward the Administration received more pressure.

Online Assignment #2

2012-03-01T13:16:00.001-06:00

1. The journalistic community as a whole failed to communicate to the public the "truth." A scenario that represents a microcosm for the entire charade was George W. Bush's press conference. Bush pre-pricked reporters to ask scripted questions that Bush's staff had provided answers to and when reporters went off script, Bush directly called them out, guiding their questions back into his realm of knowledge. The journalist's responsibility is first to the people and the representation of the "facts" and in this situation, the community as a whole failed in presenting citizens with non-biased "truth" and instead replaced it with cookie cutter responses manipulated by large corporations and government.

2/3. Where they journalists failed was in accordance with their allegiance to large corporations and from governmental pressure. Big corporations, that provide advertisement to newspapers, pushed for reporters to print Afghanistan news with reminders of 9/11 and patriotic gestures. Journalists were given "information" from the government that could be printed and when newspapers printed different perspectives on 9/11 that didn't align with Washington's views on the situation, those papers were immediately deemed "un-patriotic." This fear of "non-patriotic" reporting kept many journalists from printing other sources of information in case they lost any funding from large corporations or the ear of the public due to their statements. The pressures came from all sides: Washington and the Oval Office, large corporations, and the public. Not only did Washington provide the "correct" information to journalists to report but the fact that they abided by the Oval Office's rules was ridiculous. Then, to make matters worse, large corporations provided their own type of economical pressure that forced journalists to report only information that corporations had deemed correct and balanced with a steady stream of patriotic support to balance the scale of war reporting. Lastly, the public provided pressure in their own way by wanting a figure (Hussain) that they could blame the attack on and rally behind their troops to retaliate with a congressional sanctioned war.

4. The different between the alternate news outlets was exposure. The Washington Press Corps provided information that they found when traveling to the Middle East. However, when the Corps went to the Middle East they were contained within a "bubble" of security and other Washington reporters which limited their exposure to the true everyday life of Middle Eastern citizens and the interrelations of Al-Queda and Hussain. Reporters and journalists that were already stationed in the Middle East and had established contacts with local authorities and citizens were provided with the "real" information and due to the pressures from outside sources, were suppressed when they gave different information than the Washington News Corps. This clashing of different sources in relation to exposure to the "true" life of Middle Eastern citizens and the terrorist group AL-Queda was the main reason that news outlets differed in opinion and information.

Online Assignment 2

2012-03-01T00:55:00.003-06:00

1) How well did the journalisticcommunity live up to its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?

The majority of journalists failed topresent the facts to the readers during the Iraq War. Completely ignoring theirtraining, journalists reported the news they were fed from the government,rather than seeking out and investigating the claims. After the 9-11 attacksmany journalist felt pressure to write stories that were in favor of thegovernment, so as to not be criticized as unpatriotic. While it is likely thatsome facts were presented thorough the years, typically they were reported byaccident, rather than journalistic integrity.

2) Where they failed, why didthey do so?

Journalists failed to report the factsbecause they were stuck between remaining “patriotic” and reporting governmentstatements, or analyzing and investigating the government reports and seemingunpatriotic. Journalists in all forms ofmedia felt the pressure to support the government in order to maintain theiraudience approval. In a way 9-11 brought America together and by identifying acommon “enemy” as Iraq the government further solidified this unity. Bypresenting the public with the truth, the media ran the risk of being accusedof dividing the nation. Maybe it was that during this new time of connectednessthe majority of media sources began to trust that the government was reportingthe truth, or maybe they even believed the government was fudging the details,but with the US’s best interests in mind. It is also possible that journalistsbecame lazy and chose not to investigate or that they knew the truth, butdidn’t want to be labeled as unpatriotic.

3) Whatkinds of pressures did news organizations face?

During the aftermath of 9-11 newsorganizations were pressured to report “patriotic news”, news that agreed withgovernment claims. Media of the time conformed to the idea that news shouldagree with the government and provide little to no skepticisms of governmentclaims. News organizations faced pressure from the government, from citizens,and especially from their media peers (Fox criticizing CNN for beingunpatriotic) to report “patriotic” news.

4) How did different kinds ofnews outlets cover the issue differently? What was the difference between theseoutlets?

For the majority of news outletspatriotic news was reported. Those close to Washington (beltway) wereespecially likely to follow rules of patriotism: do not challenge or criticizeBush administration and do not report civilian casualties during war. Thoseoutside the beltway, i.e. Knight Ridder, investigated the claims. Instead ofverifying claims by calling the White House reporters, i.e. Warren Stroebl andJonathan Landay, would use overseas correspondents. Non-beltway newspapersactually evaluated news sources, taking all the claims with a grain of salt(i.e. would Hussein really put biological weapons under his compound?).Regretfully, sources like Knight Ridder (and others that actually analyzed thenews) were few and far between, often not in high-density areas.

Online Assignment #2

2012-03-01T00:22:00.001-06:00

1. How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibilityto present the ‘facts’?

I would say that they didn’t because while there may have been somejournalists looking to dig deep and get the facts, the majority of articlespublished and put on the front page were biased. After 9/11 there was a largesense of patriotism swelling in the US and solidarity swept the nation, so whenthe Bush Administration claimed that Saddam was linked to September 11^thand Iraq was potentially harboring weapons of mass destruction, the nationbelieved it and socially adopted that theory. In turn, the theory was put backinto the media and enhanced without anyone ever reallychecking the validity of their statements.

2. Where they failed, why did they do so?

They failed for two reasons. The first is because they let theiremotions play a large role in the way they formed their articles. This is because manyreporters were feeling very patriotic so they were expressing it in their work.They were also failing to check their sources and analyze the information theyhad. The information they were using was unreliable because they were using secondary sources. For instance, the documentary said that writers were using facts that they got fromother writers so the majority weren’t gathering primary data of their own. Theyalso failed to analyze and check the information they had been presented with for any inconsistencies or flaws.

3. What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?

Since the nation was so inflated with patriotism, many organizationshad a hard time questioning or challenging what the government was saying.Organizations that went against public opinion were harshly criticized and madeto feel disloyal. They were accused of being anti-American if they, forexample, “focused on causalities in Afghanistan” or became “critical of agovernment that’s leading us in war time.”

4. How did different kinds of news outlets cover the issue differently?What was the difference between these outlets?

The beltway played a significant role in the way that news outletscovered the issue. Outlets near Washington tended to agree with the governmentand placed a large emphasis on destroying Saddam. For example, the documentaryquoted FOX saying that, “It's no longer a question ofif, it's a question of how we go after Saddam Hussein.” This is in contrast toCNN trying to show causalities in Afghanistan and being accused of being anti-American.However, there were some exceptions to the beltway model. The KnightRidder News Service is one of them because they worked hard to uncover the truth and get the facts. Sadly, they were unheard because they were smaller and less influential than the New York Times or the Washington Post.

Online Assignment #2

2012-02-29T23:50:00.003-06:00

1. How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the "facts"?

Overall, the journalistic community did not do a good job of presenting the facts to the American public. The news organizations made a lot of assumptions and referenced many links that had not been fully investigated or confirmed. They were eager to jump to conclusions and were easily influenced by the government's authority. The news outlets failed to present readers with accurate stories and instead were gullible to the information given by the Iraqi informants. The newspapers chose to focus mostly on what they and the government wanted.

2. Where they failed, why did they do so?

The news organizations failed in various ways. For one, the journalists did not fully investigate their sources and chose to believe and trust what they wanted. Those who were stationed in the Middle East were very skeptical of what the newspapers back in the US were printing. Like those people very acquainted with the Middle East, the Knight Ridder organization was also skeptical of the accusations the government and newspapers were saying. If certain reporters were able to disprove some of the elements printed in the papers by just going on the Internet, than the big news organizations should have dug deeper to get the truth. Instead, the most notable news groups chose to fuel the idea that any type of anti-American sentiment was not acceptable. The newspapers failed because they were eager to align with the government.

3. What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?

The news organizations faced pressure from all sides. Firstly, they were presented with the tough situation regarding aligning with the government. If the newspapers chose to back up the claims made by the President but risked being seen as contradictory if they opposed him. The administration used patriotism as a way to enforce loyalty. They papers were pressured not to print anything that could be seen as opposing views to the Bush administration. The news organizations also faced indirect pressure from advertisers. In addition, the papers were also persuaded to not show civilian casualties and rather focus on the Middle East. Finally, during the press conference with President Bush there were already pre-chosen reporters who would be given a chance to ask their question greatly limiting the role of other reporters and their ability to find out other information.

4. How did different kinds of news outlets cover the issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

Depending on the news outlet there were some differences in the way that they presented the issues to the public. The major news organizations like the New York Times and others drew more attention and were thus read by more people as opposed to the smaller papers like Knight Ridder. The smaller newspapers couldn't fully get their side out and so could not compete with the bigger news organizations. Knight Ridder was very skeptic of the implications made by the government and other news organizations. They tried to scrutinize the government as much as possible because they did not see the "obvious" link between Iraq and that attack on 9/11. Also, TV and radio were just as important as newspapers in presenting the news to the public. The TV stations also varied in their ways in presenting the news. For example, Fox news at one point went so far to accuse CNN of being anti-American due to the way they were covering the issues.

2012-02-29T23:06:00.002-06:00

Online Assignment #2
1) How well did the journalistic community live upto its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?
Generally speaking, the journalism community did not live up to its responsibility to present the 'facts'. Although some groups from outside Washington were increasingly skeptical, the overwhelming majority of prominent journalists simply refused or rejected many questions surrounding the Iraq War. Journalists should question enormous foreign policy measures vigorously. Only years after the war began did journalists seriously question the government's motives.
2) Where they failed, why did they do so?
Many journalists were conflicted between patriotism and skepticism. Following the period of 9/11, journalists, like most Americans, were affected deeply by such a devastating attack. They, like most of us, became biased favoring the government with little to no question for their actions. News organizations also failed by failing to stand up to pressure from the government and advertisers. Many feared they would be deemed "unpatriotic" for reporting casualties. These journalists and organizations have a right to report factual information, rather than be influenced by outside forces.
3) What kinds of pressures did news organizationsface?
As discussed in the answer above, organizations were fearful they would be deemed "unpatriotic" if they did not fully support the war. This, in turn, caused advertisers to be afraid. As talked about for a few seconds in the report, advertisers forced CNN and other outlets to be less critical of the government by not reporting causalities. The government also placed an enormous pressure of news organizations to support the war. In a brilliant PR campaign, the Bush Administration successfully "sold" the war by using these news outlets to convey that Iraq was a severe threat to U.S. security.
4) How did different kinds of news outlets coverthe issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

As discussed in the report, Fox News was highly critical of CNN when reporting causalities. They also used many of their airtime to provide a pulpit for many in the Administration to state the reasons supporting the war. Geographically, news outlets in Washington were less critical of the government. In some ways, this "bubble" caused little question over the governments actions. Because the attacks occurred in Washington as well as New York, these journalists were more likely affected by 9/11 than other reporters elsewhere. In addition, many TV stations routinely used the New York Times articles for the lead stories in the Nightly News. If these reports were not true, it seems as though other outlets had no other sources.

Online Assignment #2

2012-02-29T13:55:00.002-06:00

1) How well did the journalistic community live upto its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?
As a whole, the journalistic community failed at being an informative source after the 9/11 attacks. Clearly, this trying time raised the patriotic spirit of U.S. citizens to levels that it hadn't seen in decades, if ever, but that is no excuse for not doing research before informing the public. If anything, it was the job of journalists to be extra skeptical of sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan; instead, they were puppets to the Bush administration. It is always important for journalists to question what is being said, especially when the consequences of doing nothing will result in war. Reporters in Washington and New York simply neglected this. The country suffered because they only fueled the fire to invade by making claims of Iraq and Saddam Hussein having "weapons of mass destruction," an unqualified claim.

2) Where they failed, why did they do so?

One reason why journalists didn't fulfill their responsibilities to the public was because there was very little tolerance for people speaking against what the government was saying. The environment was tense, and skepticism towards the Bush administration made one seem unpatriotic. Another issue that hindered reporters was they often were given false information from multiple sources, so while they thought they were writing truth, their stories actually had no factual backing. With people such as Ahmed Chalabi giving out false information to both government officials and journalists, this problem was inevitable.

3) What kinds of pressures did news organizationsface?

In a few cases, President Bush held conferences in which he knew what questions the reporters in the audience were going to ask him. What could be a greater pressure to news organizations that that? They had absolutely no say about what could be asked. The mentality was report what we want you to, or don't report a story. This type of reporting serves no purpose other than the propagation of dominant ideas. But at the time, it was accepted by many.

4) How did different kinds of news outlets coverthe issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

Interestingly, location was a major factor in determining how different outlets covered the situation in Iraq. Papers located in New York and Washington were much more likely to be in agreement with what the government was saying than those outside of that region. Another way that varied between sources was publications like Vanity Fair were running stories that were ridiculously fantastical. There was one report that said Hussein had trained an elite murder squad, and even had them kill vicious dogs in a pit with only their teeth. Absurdities like that were taken literally during this period though, which speaks to how much public opinion and influence can effect how we interpret media.

2012-02-28T21:53:00.002-06:00

Online Assignment 2: Buying The War

1. How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the "facts"?

The journalistic community did not perform their duty well at all. The news sources would report civilian deaths and other negative things about the war, but they would splice in 9/11 images and quotes that dramatically softened the impact of the facts. Also, the reporters stationed in the Middle East were very confused by the actions of their American brethren. Stories about Saddam Hussein's connection to 9/11 continued to appear long after it was proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was not involved. A third way the journalistic community failed was that very few of them were skeptical about the information that the Iraqi exiles offered the media. Even when the information given by the exiles seemed highly unlikely, most of the media still ate it up. When this information was reported, the American public believed it, and then everyone was wrong.

2. Where they failed, why did they do so?

The press failed for numerous reasons. First of all, the government scripted press conferences and then called on certain reporters who had been told to ask certain questions, after which the president would give the scripted answer. The new sense of patriotism also caused the press to fail. It was made wrong to question the actions of the government, because that was unpatriotic. When some journalists did report news that put the government in a negative light, that journalist or reporter was reprimanded. After a while, no one challenged the government anymore. The major news outlets didn't listen to their middle eastern reporters, and singled out Saddam Hussein. The major news sources also gave the Iraqi exiles free press, which was a mistake.
3.What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?
The news organizations faced many pressures. The government wanted war, and there was nothing the news organizations could really do to stop it. Also, as explained above, reporters and journalists were criticized for calling out the government. The nation was swept up in patriotism, and nobody wanted to go against the flow. Therefore, the government's stories ran.
4. How did different kinds of news outlets cover the issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?
The different news outlets covered the war very differently. All the major newspapers called for war and the destruction of Saddam. Even "liberal" newspapers, like the New York Times, thought that the Iraq war was justified and that Saddam should be overthrown. Smaller papers, however, sometimes reported less positive takes on the war. Fox News, like the major newspapers, was very supportive of the war. However, most other television stations were not so supportive. CNN tried to report civilian casualties, but received threatening letters and couldn't keep broadcasting the story. Other programs were skeptical, but tried to keep the tone lighter so as to not seem more critical of the government, due to the perceived consequences of going against the government.

Online Assignment #2

2012-02-28T21:52:00.001-06:00

1. How well did the journalistic community live up to its responsibility to present the ‘facts’?

To me it seems like they weren’t focused on “facts” but more what they were allowed to write, at least right after 9/11. There were memos sent out for which stories and pictures to include and that limit the journalist from finding the truths, the facts. In the movie they mentioned that certain things were to stay off the front page, in a fast past American culture people generally look at headlines and if it’s interesting will continue reading. After 9/11 people were trying to find the facts about the war, they were mislead and maybe supported a war they otherwise wouldn’t have had they gotten the “facts”.

2. Where they failed, why did they do so?

Besides being limited by memos and their editors’ rules, the government also had information they wanted to public to hear and other information they didn’t. Journalists should be skeptical and they journalists writing right after 9/11 were not skeptical except the Knight Ridder reporters who took it upon themselves to give the public the facts. The government was also marketing their own findings as fact and no journalist questioned what they found making this an example of propaganda. One part of the movie that stuck out to me was the part where they talked about journalists who went to Bagdad to research and interview, but they were in a “bubble”. They didn’t travel to where the real danger was or where the real stories where and brought back an incomplete picture of what the war was like.

3. What kinds of pressures did news organizations face?

I think the part of the movie that answers this the best is when President Bush held a press conference and had a list of specific journalists and reporters he was suppose to call on. The government controlled what information reporters got and what they could then tell the public. Journalists were not supposed to question the government or the President because that was unpatriotic. Following the government’s opinion during wartime was their job instead of finding the facts.

4. How did the different kinds of news outlets cover the issue differently? What was the difference between these outlets?

From the movie I have in my notes that CNN tried to protect the government and their opinions while Fox News tried to bust everything open. It seems like the information was limited because journalists couldn’t write about anything so the stories that headlined the morning paper also become the lead story on the evening news. In the movie several people commented that the New York Times became the leader for credible sources; once the very liberal New York Times printed that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq, people found that credible.

Discussion Questions--Marketplace of Ideas

2012-02-27T22:48:00.000-06:00

1. Do you agree with the idea that there is an "unseenhand" that ensures effectiveness of the marketplace of ideas? Dolimitations on the marketplace of ideas steer us away from democracy and fromfinding the Truth?

2. Do you agree that the marketplace of ideas is endangeredin today's society? What are some present day examples of how the marketplaceis or isn't endangered?

3. John Stuart Millbelieved that the only legitimate reason for infringing on freedom ofexpression was to "prevent harm to other persons" (142). Do you agree/Whendo you think it is appropriate to infringe on freedom of expression?

4. How are theprimary media firms working to eliminate competition? What effect will thishave knowing the Truth?

5. How would you compare/contrast the marketplaceof ideas with the models of communication we've studied thus far? (two stepflow, magic bullet, etc)

2012-02-13T19:51:00.001-06:00

Research Report: Media That Stir Emotions by Glenn Sparks

“MediaThat Stir Emotions” is the seventh chapter of Sparks’ book, MediaEffects Research. The book was published in January 2009 by CengageLearning publishers. Media Effects Research examines therelationship between the mass media and the public and the effects that themass media has on the public.

GlennG. Sparks has been a professor in the department of communication at PurdueUniversity since 1986. He has a son, two daughters, a dog, and plays theTheremin. He has written another bookabout the media entitled “Refrigerator Rights: Our Crucial Need for CloseRelationships”. His work on the effects of the paranormal in media has beencited by The National Science Foundation in both 2000 and 2002.

“MediaThat Stir Emotions” mostly covers the effects of fear in the media, but alsocovers other emotional reactions to media near the end of the chapter. Sparks interviews college students about theirchildhood reactions to certain movies such as Nightmare on Elm Street and TheExorcist to prove that frightening childhood experiences can carry over toadulthood. The article also states that what scares one child may not scareanother. Sparks cites an experiment he did using the show “The Incredible Hulk”to see what parts of the show frightened children of different ages. He foundthat younger children were more afraid of the Hulk itself, but older childrenwere more afraid of fire and collapsing buildings (real world fears). Sparks then examines the sexual and euphoricdynamics of terrifying media by citing research that states that when women actfrightened of media, men find them more attractive, and when men remain cooland calm during scary films women find them more attractive. Sparks finisheswith other reactions to the media, such as empathy, and how the media effectsmood management.

Onlinereviews of Media Effects Research werevery positive, citing the interest and importance of the information Sparksdivulges.

Media Effects Research shares somevaluable information pertaining to the media’s effect on child development andthe media’s ability to scare us. However, Sparks seems to think the media issomething to be scared of, a beast to be bested and controlled. While I see thevalidity of this argument, I disagree. The media is a tool to be used, not anenemy. I would also say that while some types of media are inappropriate forchildren, there is a market of people who enjoy frightening media. As Sparkssays in his chapter, people like to be scared.

Research on “Wounded but not slain"

2012-02-12T23:52:00.000-06:00

A History of the Book in America has five volumes in total. This series of books investigates the development of print culture in America from colonial times to the end of 20th century. The five volumes are as follows respectively:
Volume 1: The Colonial Book in the Atlantic World
Volume 2: An Extensive Republic: Print, Culture, and Society in the New Nation, 1790-1840
Volume 3: The Industrial Book, 1840-1880
Volume 4: Print in Motion: The Expansion of Publishing and Reading in the United States, 1880-1940
Volume 5: The Enduring Book: Print Culture in Postwar America

The fifth volume in which the article is selected from focused on how social, economic, and political changes after WWII has influenced the development of American print culture. To be more specific, this volume addressed the impacts of the Cold War, advances in technology and education and having a stronger government.

James Baughman, the author of "Wonderful but not slain: The orderly retreat of the American newspaper", is one of the 32 contributors to this volume. As we all have seen Professor Baughman in lecture, he is a professor from School of Journalism in UW-Madison and teaches on the history of American mass communication also specializes in television's first decade and relations between press and politics since 1948. He wrote four books: Same Time, Same Station: Creating American Television 1948-1961; Television's Guardians: The Federal Communications Commission and the Politics of Programming, 1958-67; Henry R. Luce and the Rise of the Modern American News Media; and Republic of Mass Culture:Journalism, Broadcasting, and Filmmaking in America since 1941.

The article from our course reader summarized several trends of how newspaper industry has changed after WWII. Baughman looked into many aspects of the ups and downs of newspapers and analyzed in even narrower areas over time: the kinds of newspaper, contents, readership, demographics of journalists, economics of the industry, roles of newspaper in society, and competition from TVs and the Internet. He also offered in-depth explanations to the reasons of these changes and some outlooks for newspaper's future.

2012-02-11T22:50:00.000-06:00

Discussion Questions For "Media That Stir Emotions"
1. An interesting theory Sparks discusses is that watching scary movies is a substitute for tribal rites of passage, in which exposure to fear or pain was way of proving one's manliness. This may explain why males prefer scary movies more than females. A study was also conducted that found males who aren't scared by movies are seen as more attractive by females. Do you agree that watching scary movies has become a modern form of proving one's manliness--or is that too extreme to say for certain? Why?
2. Dolf Zillman suggested that the massive amount of mixed messages, and the rate that TV forces them onto us, confuses humans because we cannot fully process our emotions before something new is being thrown at us. Do you agree with this? I know that I often feel overwhelmed when watching TV or browsing the internet. Also, if this is the case, do you think we will adapt to our ever accelerating media--or will we have to modify the way we consume in order to soothe our minds?
3. Sparks argues that although violence in media can have very profound effects on an individual's aggression, but also claims that the effects of paranormal or frightening media are much broader. An example of this is the "War of the Worlds" broadcast, which caused a large number of people to panic. Can you think of another instance in which frightening media had an impact on a large body of People? And do you agree that paranormal media reaches more people than violence? Why or why not?
4. Sparks notes that empathy plays a major role in how we perceive media. He cites a study in which third graders are exposed to a movie. There are four possible movies that they can see: a good person having good things happen to them, a bad person having good things happen to them, a bad person having bad things happen to them, or a good person having bad things happen to them. Consequentially, students who saw the good person have good things happen to them and the bad person have bad things happen to them felt positive emotions at the end of the movie. The opposite was the case for students viewing the other two. Do you think movies can be used as an effective tool for teaching morals to children? It certainly seems like many TV programs aim to do this.
5. Sparks claims, in conjunction with Piaget's stages of cognitive development, that children can be scared by simply showing them scary images, regardless of their context. He cites children being afraid of movies such as "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" and "101 Dalmatians," which are not supposed to be scary. Do you agree that this is all it takes to scare a child 2-7 years old? Are there any specific movies you can remember scaring you, but weren't supposed to?

Research Report: Paul Starr, Coda: The Advent of the Media

2012-02-06T21:11:00.002-06:00

Paul Starr’s article in the course reader entitled Coda: The Advent of the Media, is thetwelfth chapter of his much longer book TheCreation of the Media, published in 2004 by the Basic Books PublishingCompany, and won the Goldsmith Book award for the aforementioned book in 2005.The book is a brief history of the beginnings of modern media primarily in theUSA, starting shortly before the American Revolution.

Paul Starr wasborn May 2, 1949, and releases astonishingly little information about himselfover the internet. Paul Starr hasasserted himself as a prolific writer, and has written many books starting inthe early eighties and continuing to the present day. In 1990 Starr cofoundedThe American Prospect, a liberal newsletter giving opinions on politics andmore. In 1993, Paul Starr served as an advisor to the Clinton administrationand helped them create a new healthcare plan. He is currently a professor ofsociology and public affairs at Princeton University, an active politicalspeaker, and one of the leading experts on Healthcare Reforms.

Paul Starr’s article in the coursereader covers an awful lot of subjects in a rather short amount of space. He begins with describing how the mediabecame less of something meant to spread knowledge of current events, and moreof a corporation. Also, with the advent of movies and radio, people werebecoming more saturated with information than ever. This created a potentialfor the media to have a powerful influence over the general public. Meanwhile,WWI was proving just how useful radio and telegraph were. The quick transfer ofmessages over long distances that could not previously be reached was provingto be an effective tool. However, themedia in America at the time became uber-patriotic, and reduced tolerance forimmigrants and foreign people.

While the US was using the media to help freedom of speech and enablethe use of rights, fascist countries such as Russia and Germany were using mediato further their regime, resulting in government controlled media. Liberal democracies denied states completepower over media, but there still was a large component of state building inmedia, namely patriotic articles and propaganda. However, press rapidly becamethe symbol of freedom of speech in the US, and an agent of publicaccountability. While the government censored television and radio, the presswas considered protected by the first amendment and remained uncensored. Despite this, the media began to distort asnewspapers, TV stations and radio stations became more corporate. The shift inview of the media from viewing the public as readers to consumers is paramountto how the media developed into what it is today.

Reviews of his book The Creation of the Media indicate thatit is not a politically aligned book, and issues that are confronted by thebook are purely issues of history and problems throughout it. Paul Starr is anationally lauded figure with a great deal of expertise in a great many areas,and therefore we can trust that the chapter of his book is reliable fact.

Ultimately, the 12^thchapter of Starr’s book is not something that is open to major interpretation.It is a history lesson, and is based in fact, and seems to be entirely reliable.That’s not to say it shouldn’t be questioned or accepted blindly, but it is areliable article, not meant to provoke a reaction. Paul Starr wrote this bookas an informative publication, to enlighten the public, and not to present hisopinion on a subject. Starr’s article should be accepted as fact meant to helpstudents build informed opinions about the development of the history of mediaas well as the current media.

Discussion Questions for Paul Starr Article

2012-02-06T20:11:00.001-06:00

1. With the revolution of cheap print and the growth of penny newspapers, the media expanded into areas under the code of "universal access." How did this ability for everyone to have access positively and negatively influence cultural forms?

2. Consequently, how did the printed word after becoming part of the environment affect aspects of social, economical, and military systems?

3. If the origins of modern communications had come from liberal and democratic systems, then how did the media develop along lines of commercially driven media and through mass distortion of public knowledge?

4. How has the change in media from specific journals and pamphlets to the creation of new means of scientific investigation of the public world affect not only journalists themselves but the public's view of everyday coverage?

5. How has the interaction between political parties and the government within media coverage, changed now that media funding has become independent of partisan funding?

Research Report, The Unbeautiful Game by Adam Gopnik

2012-02-06T17:24:00.001-06:00

“The Unbeautiful Game, What’s happening to football” by Adam Gopnik was published in the January 8, 2007 edition of The New Yorker. The New Yorker originated in 1925 as a weekly magazine, being written in a satire style one that would appeal to a hirer class in a slightly more humorous way. It is now written 47 times a year still in satire form. In 1985 the magazine took over a media company, possibly giving Gopnik a negative opinion of media since the magazine changed its style just a year after he got there. This could be why Gopnik considers media to be a disadvantage for sports broadcasting instead of an enhancement.

Adam Gopnik was born in Philadelphia but grew up in Quebec where his parents both worked at McGill University and where he studied liberal arts while working at the school paper. He is known for his depth of topics from sports to the arts and for his journals of his time in Paris. He started working in New York, for the New Yorker, in 1986 where he now lives permanently with his family. In the article Gopnik explains how media is changing the way fans experience football games. Gopnik uses New York Jets’ great Joe Namath as a bench mark for great football. From this comparison and other biases it seems, as though Gopnik is a Jets fan, also writing against the Patriots and Giants. Readers’ responses seem to be impressed with his ‘New Yorkerness’, but his Canadian upbringing still shines through in terms of how sports watching are embedded in almost every American.

A sport alliance aside, Gopnik writes about how football has become “unbeautiful” since it is so funneled by television. He argues that books about the game itself are boring, but the books telling stories of players and their lives off the field are the interesting accounts. Most of these stories are from players who are not necessarily the stars on television. This also brings up the issue of the distribution of money in the country. The wealthier are able to see the game live, choosing where to look on the field while the lesser fortunate of the population see the game through the scope of media. The game becomes about specific players and what the media thinks the viewers want to see.

I find all his information credible and his argument a valid one, however I think that technology and media takes away from the magic of the sport, but it also adds to it. Originally sports were only viewed live, then on radio, and now streaming through the television and computers. While it does limit what you can see on the field and in the stadium, it also allows more people to be a part of the event taking place. Reviews from readers indicated that while they saw where Gopnik was coming from, they felt that viewing sports on television during their childhood, prompted their sports activity and competitiveness. One thing that reviews and Gopnik could both agree on was that the stories that come from sports truly move both readers and viewers. The next great technological advancement in athletic broadcasting is a button on your remote that allows you to mute just the announcers and enhance the volume on the field.

Online Assignment

2012-02-02T14:36:00.001-06:00

Name and hometown: I'm Missy Heck, from Wauwatosa, WI (suburb of Milwaukee)

Possible future job? Anybody in that job you really admire now?

I am currently undeclared as a major, but am considering studying some sort of business and possibly going to Law School. However, my dream job would be working in the music industry with music production.

Do you consume “news”? If you do, what are your main sources?

I have a subscription to TIME so I read that weekly. I also use the app for NPR news on my phone, as well as the New York Times. Occassionally I'll get news from Twitter or Facebook too.

What kind of music do you like? (It could appear in lecture.)

I like most genres of music, and was raised on Bruce Springsteen, The Beatles and country music. I am also really into indie/folk/alt music as well. Some of my favorites are Fitz & the Tantrums, The National, Matt & Kim, and Andrew Bird

Favorite online video (link to it): I love the Ellen pranks, especially this one

What recent pop culture expression do you love (or find yourself using)?

anything that is said on 30 Rock, or in Mean Girls

Assignment One

2012-01-31T15:24:00.005-06:00

Name and hometown:

Jordan Bauer -- Brookfield, Wisconsin

Possible future job? Anybody in that job you really admire now?

I would love to become a speech writer maybe even for politicians. Giving speeches are horrible experiences for me but I love writing speeches so becoming a speech writer would be the best of both worlds then! I do not know of anyone in the job I admire but some one whom I do admire is Natalie Morales with the Today Show.

Do you consume “news”? If you do, what are your main sources?

I do consume basically everyday. I wake up and turn my television onto NBC and watch the Today Show while getting ready and then throughout the day I will watch In Session or CNN daily and will more likely flip to E! News. Though I do not pay close attention every time it is on I will catch the main stories of the day. I also use Facebook and Twitter or word of mouth to pay attention to certain news stories or issues.

What kind of music do you like? (It could appear in lecture.)

I basically like all music and will listen to all types however, Country is my favorite genre and puts me into a good mood. Some of my favorite artists are Jason Aldean and Kenny Chesney.

Favorite online video (link to it):

Sophia Grace is such a diva and this video just brightens your day because of how cute and talented might I add these girls are while performing. If you like their video check out them on the Ellen Show for even more entertainment.

What recent pop culture expression do you love (or find yourself using)?

I do not necessarily notice myself using certain expressions more than others but on the top of my head I know I use the word “like” more than necessary as well as “literally” in basically every sentence.

Assignment 1--Cecilia (Si) Miao

2012-01-31T15:20:00.001-06:00

Name and hometown: Hey everyone! My name is Cecilia Miao. I come from Guangzhou, China. If you would be interested in looking into the map, it's at the southeastern coast of China, near Hong Kong.

Possible future job: My biggest problem is that I want to do too many things at one time. I want to teach, do marketing research or work in public relations. I really admire Zimo Zeng. She graduated from Dartmouth and is now working in Phoenix Television as an anchor. So my dream job will be talking and analyzing news on international relations on Phoenix, which is one of the few outspoken televisions in China.

Do you consume "news"? Yes. If I am in China, I will watch news from television. I also buy weekly magazines from certain news agencies that focus on particular topics of the week. Here in US I don't buy newspaper and my major source is the Internet. I also follow interesting scholars and journalists on Twitter and read what they tweet.

What kind of music do you like? I like many kinds. I like Jazz and I have an obsession with female vocalists who have very stretchy and special voices. One example is Shiina Ringo from Japan. I really like the music from Twilight regardless of the movie itself. The songs are pretty chill. MUSE is really good! I love them too.

Favorite online video: It's "Shit Asian girls say". I think it's really typical about the Asian girls. XD

What recent pop culture expression do you love? To be honest, growing up in a world very different from the US, I am very well educated with the Chinese pop culture expression. After I came here I learned to use "legit", "swag", "FYI", "ight", etc. I want to learn more if anyone is willing to teach me. I promise I will abuse them (not in our homework or research reports though).

2012-01-31T09:51:00.000-06:00

Published by TheEconomist on December 17^th 2001, “How Luther went viral”, showsthe impact that social networks can have on a society and just how quickly informationcan spread. The article itself focuseson media relative to the 16^th century and how Martin Luther was ableto use it to start the Reformation, as well as draws comparisons to the typesof media we use today. From lecture, welearned that prior to the 1600s, “news” flow was very limited and mainly consistedin the form of oral accounts and personal letters. This fact makes it even more remarkable thatLuther’s pamphlets were read by so many people and spread so quickly.

Established in 1843 by James Wilson, The Economist is a magazine and onlinesource for articles dealing with international news, politics, business,finance, and technology. "How Luther went viral", clearly deals with the topics of politics and technology. Currently ithas offices located in New York, London, and San Francisco. One thing that is unusual about the The Economist is that it calls itself anewspaper even though it’s printed as a magazine and all the articles appear ontheir website. Another interesting factabout The Economist is that all itsarticles are anonymous. The reason forthis is that they believe WHAT isbeing written is more important than WHOis writing it. Because of this I wasunable to find the actual author of the article.

When thinking about why the specific examples of facebookand twitter were chosen, I think it’s clear that those two examples are themost prominent in today’s culture and make up a huge portion of our social interaction. Facebook and twitter allow us to communicatewith one another without directly speaking with each other. The way Luther’s pamphlets were circulatedand passed around was much like the way people post and retweet thingstoday. His pamphlets quickly becamesomething that everyone felt they needed to have. The article states that Luther’s pamphlets madeup about one third of the total 6,000 pamphlets that were published inGerman-speaking lands between 1520 and 1526. Just imagine if one third of the all the posts and tweets that themillions of users on these social media sites saw for six years came from oneperson.

After researching the publisher of this article I am confidentthat the information is credible and holds some value. Because of the examples used in the article,it’s clear that it is directed towards our specific age group, the main usersof these powerful networks. We often don’trealize just how quickly things can spread in today’s news and also howimpactful these networks have become on our lives. By tying together the way news traveled inthe past to the way we do it today, TheEconomist is showing us that things aren’t so different from the way theyused to be and just how big of a role social networks can play in major eventshappening in today’s world.

2012-01-30T21:45:00.000-06:00

Assignment #1

David Burczyk from Grafton, Wisconsin

Possible future job- I honestly don't know what my future job will be. I know many jobs that I do not want to have but haven't made much progress otherwise. Hopefully, I will figure out what major fits me this semester and then decide what job I want after that.

News- I definitely consume plenty of news. I get a lot of my more "serious" news from sources like Washington Post, but I often look at sites like Yahoo in order to get more "pop culture" news. I occasionally watch the BBC as well. I also enjoy consuming more comedic media/"news" like The Onion, The Daily Show with John Stewart and the Colbert Report.

Music- Rise Against, Romanian Techno, Maroon 5, Michael Henry & Justin Robinett (They do creative covers of popular music)

Video-Doctor Horrible's Sing-Along Blog.
This is a song from the short movie/blog. It stars Neil Patrick Harris and is something I would seriously recommend to anyone.

Pop Culture expression- I normally roll my eyes at any mention of most pop-culture expressions, and I honestly can't think of one that I'm a fan of right now.

2012-01-30T20:05:00.007-06:00

Research Report

As with manyforms of mass communication, one must be cautious to fully accept theimplications and repercussions of each form of mass media. As informativecollege students, we must develop and create our own opinions from the works ofothers. As with the case of “Discovering the News, A Social History of AmericanNewspapers”, it is essential to understand why, how, and to whom this messagewill be received. Upon research, I discovered many of these answers and furtherunderstand the message conveyed by the author.

My first step infurther understanding this chapter was to learn more about its author, MichaelSchudson. Michael Schudson received his PhD in sociology from Harvard in the1970s. He then began his teaching career at the University of Chicago. Currently,he is a journalism professor at Columbia University. Since “Discovering theNews, A Social History of American Newspapers” follows a basic social history behind journalism and newspapers;it appears he wrote this book mainly for students and fellow colleagues. Given Mr.Shudson’s expertise in sociology and journalism, Mr. Schudson emphasizes thesocial implications of the “penny papers” and how they changed the economic,political, and class structure of the American public.

As Mr. Shudson’sbook appears to be used primarily as an academic source, most of theinformation he provides is factual and concrete. He does, however, question the “Literacy Argument” usingopposing viewpoints and enlist the reader to ponder the implications of thegrowing literacy trend and its contribution to the growing newspaper industryin the United States. Since much of the chapter focuses on the socialdemocratization in the United States throughout much of the 1830s, this bookappears to also provide analysis in sociology applied to a real-lifeexperience. This would seem to suggest that Mr. Shudson, while focusing onjournalism, is providing for not only journalism, but rather sociology andsociety as a whole.

The next step inuncovering further information regarding Mr. Shudson’s book was to reviewfeedback regarding his work. While many believed his book to be highlyinformative and an excellent source of information, many were disappointed inthe absence of an update to his publication. Due to the growing importance ofthe web and Internet, many felt Mr. Shudson could provide further analysis onthe changing trends of journalism and its role in society. Since this book waspublished in 1978, much critical advancement in journalism had yet to beinvented.

Overall, due toMichael Shudson’s extensive expertise in the fields of sociology andjournalism, one can assume to find a great deal of information regarding thesocial history of journalism and newspapers in his book, “Discovering the News,A Social History of American Newspapers”.In addition, due to his career in teaching, it appears his book isinformative, engaging, and directed towards students and scholars. With thisinformation, we can expect this to be a trusted source of information, withconcise and insightful commentary. While minor complaints on the lack of anupdate do exist, this chapter still provides an excellent background on thesocial implications of society and journalism.

2012-01-30T15:43:00.002-06:00

Name and Hometown: Elliot Parens, Saint Paul MN.

Possible future job: Truthfully I have no idea. I have no declared major, so hopefully once I take care of that that will narrow down the future job search. An ideal job for me would be some kind of reporter for National Geographic, doing articles about environment and animals, which have always been a point of interest for me. But, that is a long shot.

I do consume news sometimes. I don't do a great job of keeping up with everything by actual news sources, but I am an avid SNL watcher, and try to stay up to date with it. Sadly, that and facebook are probably my main news sources.

I am not partial to any type of music. I like most kinds. My parents are both classical musicians, so I was raised on a steady diet of the "classical greats". That got old, and I eventually went into my dads old Grateful Dead albums, which progressed to Led Zeppelin, and eventually to whatever. Im currently going through a big blue grass phase, and one of my new favorite groups is Trampled by Turtles. The fact that they come from duluth has only a small portion to do with how much I like them.

My favorite online video is definitely any of the bad lip reading's done on any of the GOP candidates. I am not a remarkably political guy but I do tend not to side with the republican party, which makes this just a little more entertaining for me. this link (http://badlipreading.tumblr.com/) should get you to most of them. They do other things too. Its worth an investigation.

When I use pop culture expressions, I'm usually not paying attention enough to notice that I did. I'm a big movie quoter, and I frequently quote things that I hear in movies. A personal favorite is Anchor Man, and I try to fit in at least one line from that a day, regardless of whether or not its actually relevant.

Discussion questions for The Age of Egalitarianism: The Penny Press

2012-01-30T13:36:00.003-06:00

1. How would journalism and media in general be different today had the six-penny papers remained the dominate source of news? Would we still have access to and be interested in the same types of human interest stories? Or would we still be solely limited to party papers?

Sample response: Had the penny press not been so monumental in expanding and developing the idea of "news", our ways of receiving information would be much different. I believe that eventually another type of commercial press would have been created had it not been the penny press. However, it is because of the penny press that individuals began getting so involved with stories and events pertaining to other people, which is something that continues to be a huge interest to many people.

2. How has media consumption changed with the development of the internet and the social websites that go along with it like Twitter and Facebook? What has journalism lost or gained with the transformation from printed newspapers to online articles?

Sample response: After reading a few of the posts for the first online assignment, I found that very few people actually read a newspaper or articles not found on the internet. I feel as though by using the internet to read about news that a reader has more access to information than when just reading a newspaper. For example, if someone is reading an article pertaining to a certain topic, it is not difficult to click a few times revealing even more similar articles.

Assignment #1

2012-01-30T12:51:00.003-06:00

Name and hometown: I'm Kali Dahlquist from Edina, Minnesota (a suburb of Minneapolis)

Possible future job? Right now I am undecided with regard to my major but I'm leaning towards Sociology and maybe something involving criminal justice.

Do you consume "news"? If you do, what are your main sources? I mainly consume news through Facebook and Twitter. I follow multiple news sources on Twitter like CNN. I also have various apps on my iphone that keep me updated with what's going on around the world! I hardly ever watch the news on TV, but if it's on I'll watch it.

What kind of music do you like? I'm really into all types and genres of music, especially country. My parents' music from their generation has also really had a big influence on me over the years. Some of my favorites are James Taylor, Creedence Clearwater Revival, and Tracy Chapman.

Favorite online video: I don't really watch that many YouTube videos but my friends send them to me all the time and this one of a cat I find hilarious.

What recent pop culture expression do you love (or find yourself using)? I don't really notice the expressions that I use but my friends and I abbreviate things all the time. Also, I sometimes find myself saying "sucks to suck", except I think my friends say it more often than me.

Assignment #1

2012-01-29T21:30:00.003-06:00

Name and hometown: Mickey Gibson from Minneapolis, MN

Possible future job: I am currently a creative writing major and hope to continue on in education and become a writing fellow; traveling to various colleges and teaching year long workshops around the world.

Do you consume news? I consume news from various social media outlets like Twitter and other online newspapers (New York Times, The Huffington Post, etc.) and scroll through the top new stories. Also, sometimes when I come back to the lobby of my apartment building I snag a copy of the New York Times from apartment #1096 (sorry Kim Jae-Duh and friends!).

What kind of music do you like? I love music. All types. Anything from the jazz music of Thelonious Monk, to R & B of D'Angelo, the slow sound of James Blake, to the smooth voice Norah Jones and Amy Winehouse.

Favorite online video: One of my favorite online videos comes from a sport I don't watch much unless number 24 is playing: Kobe Bryant. Here Kobe scores 81 points in one game, the second highest show of scoring since Wilt Chamberlain scored over 100 points. Kobe Killing It.

What recent pop culture expression do you find yourself using? I don't really use any expressions but tend to just stick with basic lines, such as "you are being a huge idiot."

Assignment #1

2012-01-29T20:40:00.001-06:00

Name and hometown: Hey everyone! My name is Lauren Handzlik and I am from Wauwatosa, WI-- a suburb just outside of Milwaukee.

Possible future job? Anybody in that job you really admire now? While I am in the business school I currently have NO idea my major or what I would like to do with my life; however, it will probably end up something along the lines of marketing. We shall see...

Do you consume “news”? If you do, what are your main sources? I, too, consume all my news in more modern ways. I am avid user of any and all social media such as Twitter and Facebook. Also, The Huffington Post is my homepage and even have the app on my phone which offers notifications when big news happens. I am not one to really make an effort to watch the news, but if its on I will watch it.

What kind of music do you like? (It could appear in lecture.) I love any type of music for the most part and love going to concerts. The past two summers I have attended Lollapalooza in Chicago. Additionally, this summer I made the long trek down to Tennessee to camp out in 90 degree weather at Bonnaroo. Some of my favorites include Florence and the Machine, Cold War Kids, Lykke Li and Bon Iver.

Favorite online video (link to it): I am really into the "Shit _______ Say" videos that people have been posting recently and also watch Timeflies Tuesday videos every Tuesday.

What recent pop culture expression do you love (or find yourself using) I guess I am not really aware of what expressions I use, but my friends and I always catch ourselves using abbreviations or picking up one-liners from TV shows.

2012-01-29T19:33:00.002-06:00

Assignment #1

Name and Hometown: Eric Jacobson, Westby WI

Possible Future Job? At this moment, I'm still undecided on my major. I may major in business or journalism. My dream job, however, would be a broadcaster or play-by play announcer for ESPN.

Consume News? I almost always have my TV on, whether it be ESPN or the evening news. I would say my main source of news would be from either a TV or the internet. Some sites I visit often are ESPN, CNN, Facebook, and Twitter.

What kind of Music do you like? I like most kinds of music, but I don't have a big favorite. I really don't like country though!

Favorite online video: I'm a big sports fan so I would choose Skip Bayless All He Does is Win

Pop Culture: Sticking with the sports theme, I would say the "tebowed" phenomenon.

Assignment #1

2012-01-29T17:41:00.000-06:00

Name and Hometown: John Blaser, Germantown WI

Possible future job? At the moment, I'm not really focusing on the specifics as much as I am focusing on choosing a major. A career in sports journalism or something of the sort appeals to me though. If I do go that route, ESPN or Sports Illustrated would be my first choice of employers.

Do you consume news? Yes, but I wouldn't exactly call myself an educated citizen when it comes to world news. I get most of my news through Facebook and ESPN, although I do try to keep up by occasionally reading the newspaper or watching a news oriented television program.

What kind of music do you like? I listen to a variety of artists, from O.A.R. to J.Cole, to Explosions in the Sky, depending on my mood. I tend to go to country in the summer because I can play along with my guitar.

Favorite online video? It's hard to pick one, but this guy is hilarious, and I'm going to start to talk to people like he does:

What recent pop culture expression do you use? After Jay-Z and Kanye West released Watch the Throne this summer, the phrase 'ball so hard' has become popular. Terrell Suggs, an NFL linebacker, cites his university as 'Ball so hard University'. I catch myself repeating lines from the album as well.

Discussion starter assignment for "How Luther went Viral"

2012-01-29T16:28:00.002-06:00

#1. How were the forms of communication available to Luther during the Reconstruction similar to forms of Communication now? How were they different?

My sample response: The forms of communication were spread throughout cities and towns and reached all classes, from kings to peasants, just as they can be spread now. However, they were not electronic. Because literacy rates were lower, written word was probably not communicated as well as it is now. Also, the internet is basically accessible to anyone now, so anyone can communicate their ideals. If someone didn't have enough money to pay for a printing press and didn't have some person in the world that would finance the printing, their voice would not be as likely to be heard.

#2. What were woodcuts? How were they valuable in ways that written pamphlets were not?

Assignment #1

2012-01-29T12:42:00.000-06:00

Name and Hometown : Elliot Kotecki from Port Washington, WI

Possible future job? Anyone in that job you really admire now? Working for an athletic/sporting goods company like Nike or Under Armour and managing the company's operations and supply chain. Anything dealing with sports would be great. No one in that field that I really admire right now.

Do you consume "news"? If you do, what are your main sources? Yes, I consume news through the internet and television. I get most of my news from ESPN, Facebook, and Twitter. I read newspapers occasionally and magazines every once in a while.

What kind of music do you like? I like a variety of different kinds of music like country, hip hop, and rock. My favorite groups are Zac Brown Band and Timeflies. Pretty much any song that has you singing along by the end is good with me. I also am learning to play guitar.

Favorite online video : I love the show Friends and the bloopers from the show always make me laugh.

What recent pop culture expression do you use or find yourself using? I think it's interesting how everyone has started using the hash tag (#) on twitter and for other things. I use it a lot as well when I use twitter, but it just seems like now everything we say has to fall under some sort of category. Before twitter, I never would have thought of doing that.

Alexis' Assignment #1

2012-01-28T17:43:00.000-06:00

Hello fellow J201ers! My name is Alexis Blakey and I'm from Granton, WI. I'm a sophomore, planning on double majoring in Journalism and Sociology. I haven't really zeroed in on a specific career, but it'll be strategic communications related. Without a specific career in mind, it is hard to truly admire someone.

Yes, I consume news. I consume news in a more modern way, versus the traditional way though, I get my news from friends and family and internet sites like yahoo. I find it hard to take the time to read a newspaper or watch the news every night. It's easier for me to catch up with a friend on the way to class or quick read a facebook post.

It's hard to say what kind of music I like because I listen to a variety of genres. Just looking through my top 25 on ITunes I've got Maino, The Temptations, Florence and The Machine and A Day To Remember. But if I could only listen to one artist every again it would definitely be Adele, she is brilliant!

I don't have a favorite go to video, but I love SNL digital shorts. If ever I need a quick pick me up I'll go to hulu and watch a couple.

I'm sure I use a lot of pop expressions, they just aren't always that obvious to me. Hmm, I know that I add "ed" onto website names when I look things up: Googl"ed", Youtub"ed", or IMDB"ed" (i.e. "Hey I just IMDBed that new Underworld movie, it looks interesting."). I'm sure I'll think of more later.

I'm Really Bad At Witty Titles

2012-01-26T20:39:00.000-06:00

Hi everyone! I'm Emma Burton and I'm from a teeny tiny town of 650 people called Montfort. It's about an hour drive west of here.

I'm double majoring in environmental studies and conservation, so I would really like to work for the Sierra Club. I am most interested in local consumption and local vs. organic products, so I would like to do research on the effects of pesticides and if they outweigh the monetary and environmental costs of shipping organic products.
He's not in this specific job, but I really admire Bill Cronon, a professor here on campus. He's a huge name in the environmental community and I think he does fantastic work. Jack Kloppenburg is another person I'm glad to know and learn from because he's very down to earth and real.

I absolutely consume news. I follow the Wisconsin State Journal because local news is important to me. Other than that, a lot of what I learn about is by word of mouth, and then I usually go and look up the issue online for more information.

I'm a big fan of indie folk music, as well as punk rock. Ingrid Michaelson is my favorite artist, and David Ford is a close second. Some more are Newton Faulkner, the Guggenheim Grotto, Ben Folds, Bess Rogers, Matthew Perryman Jones, Great Lake Swimmers, and Feist. I love live jazz and I listen to musical soundtracks all the time. I play trombone and sing and considered majoring in music for most of my high school career, so it's close to my heart.

I love Harry Potter in 99 Seconds (I just love Harry Potter in general) as well as Hannah Hart's online series "My Drunk Kitchen."

In case you've never seen the video Thumbs Up for Rock and Roll, you should go watch it right now! I love the saying "I feel happy of myself." It just makes me smile because the little kid in the video is so pumped to learn to ride his bike.

My online assignment

2012-01-25T23:23:00.003-06:00

Name and Hometown: Mike Davis, Janesville, WI

Possible Future Job: my total dream job would be as a professional baseball scout. One person I really admire in professional baseball is the General Manger of the Minnesota Twins, Terry Ryan. He started as a scout. I've heard him speak a few times, and I really like his style and how straight forward he is when he speaks.

Do I consume news? Of course I consume news. There is no way not to. Most of my general public news comes from the yahoo homepage headlines. However, I get a lot of news from mlb.com and the MLB network, because I'm a huge baseball fan and I follow baseball year-round.

What kind of music do you like: My favorite band is called State Radio. I also listen to a lot of Bob Dylan. I don't have one favorite band.

Favorite Online video: I'm a big fan of stand-up comedy, especially that of Aziz Ansari

I'm very out of the loop as far as pop culture, and I don't think I use a lot of pop culture sayings. The sayings I use are probably pretty old.

Introduction

2012-01-25T23:18:00.001-06:00

Name and Hometown: Jake Smasal from Kaukauna, Wisconsin

Possible Future Job? Not really sure what I would like to do at this point, but if I had to pick a job, it would be as either a PR representative or ad man for an international company. It's probably a little cliche, but I would love to do what they do on Mad Men. (Does this make Don Draper my hero? I hope not...)

Do You Consume "News"? I sure do, mostly from online sources. I follow all of the major news networks and magazines on Twitter, and I like browsing through the headlines to see which ones I find interesting. Also, if the opportunity arises (meaning that I get it for free), I have been known to read the newspaper or magazines.

What Type Of Music Do You Like? Lately I've been listening to a lot of LCD Soundsystem and The Decemberists, and I generally like alternative and classic rock, as well as some rap.

Favorite Online Video: After much thought, I have decided that my favorite video is probably the .Pork and Beans music video by Weezer.

What Pop Culture Expression Do You Find Yourself Using? I have a tendency to bust out Godfather quotes from time to time, particularly "I'll make you an offer you can't refuse" and "You broke my heart, Fredo. You broke it".

A More Formal Introduction

2012-01-25T19:31:00.001-06:00

Hey everybody, here are a few tidbits about me and the things I enjoy:
My name is Andrew, or Andy, Holsteen and I grew up in the northwest suburbs of Chicago.

I transferred to UW-Madison this semester with the intent of applying for the J-school and--assuming nothing changes during the next few years, I would like to pursue a career in journalism, or some sort of professional writing. A few well-known people part of this field who inspire me are David Sedaris, Hunter S. Thompson, Tom Robbins, and Joan Didion.

I certainly consume news, but rarely in the traditional formats of newspapers and television. The reason why I don't like to subscribe to tangible sources is because I feel it's wasteful. Most articles in newspapers and magazines have limited relevance; in other words, news becomes old too quickly to spend the resources printing it on paper. At least I think that's the case, especially when the internet is easily accessible for so many people. Additionally, I prefer not to watch the news on a T.V. since it's a passive activity, the information just goes straight through my brain without sticking. For the most part, I get my news from the internet. Be it an online news source or some kind of discussion forum.

Music is something that has been important to me my whole life. Right now my favorite genres are jazz and rock. In no particular order, some of my favorite artists are Tortoise, John Coltrane, Tera Melos, The Bad Plus, Dirty Projectors, and The Avishai Cohen Trio.

This is one of my favorite videos

Love this quote/saying popularized by Sarah Palin: "I can see Russia from my backyard."

2012-01-25T18:34:00.002-06:00

Introduction:

Name and hometown: Chelsea Chrouser from Wausau, WI.

Possible future job? Anybody in that job you really admire now? I'm still not sure. I love people and traveling so I'm looking into majoring in international studies and either marketing or advertising/pr.

Do you consume “news”? If you do, what are your main sources? Yes, I consume news mainly on the internet but I just got a subscription to the new york times. I also use facebook and twitter to get news.

What kind of music do you like? I love John Mayer and like just about anything else. Some of my recent favorites are Smile by Keegan Smith, Bad by The Cab and Storm Warning by Hunter Hayes.

Favorite online video (link to it): The eHarmony cat lady.

What recent pop culture expression do you love (or find yourself using)? I don't use many but I'm familiar with a lot of the Jersey Shore lingo even though i've only seen the show a few times. Smoosh, GTL, grenade.

An Introduction to Me :-)

2012-01-25T11:37:00.002-06:00

Name and hometown: Brady Loomis; Glencoe, Illinois

Possible future job? Anybody in that job you really admire now?: I am still figuring this out since “green” jobs are still a developing market. My other major is Environmental Studies and I hope to pair it with Strategic Communications. Right now I have my eyes set on becoming some sort of environmental photo/video journalist. Not writing articles but creating videos or taking pictures that inspire people to think sustainably.

Do you consume “news”? If you do, what are your main sources?: I would say that yes I do consume “news” and the main sources are Yahoo, Facebook, people (friends, family, classes), and occassionaly on tv on the news or the Daily Show.

What kind of music do you like?: My favorite types of music are alterative and country, however the mainstream pop songs and a few oldies are definitely also on my iTunes playlists.

Favorite online video: I decided to go two ways with this: one is a fantastic home music video (note the guy in the back) and the other is a comedy skit that I practically have memorized and I laugh every time.

What recent pop culture expression do you love (or find yourself using)?: I am currently trying to start up my own blog-I have never had a personal one before but have used a couple in classes. I also love to make iMovies, for instance I made one of my freshman year as a move-in present for my roommates.

2012-01-24T09:17:00.002-06:00

Welcome to the J201 section 303 blog. I have sent all of you an invitation to join the blog. Please accept my invitation and follow the directions on the course blog, j201.blogspot.com , to set up your account. Read the information provided under the tab "speeches" from the course blog to gain a better understanding of how we will use our blog throughout the semester. We'll talk about it more in discussion on 1/24, and Prof Wells will also cover it in detail during lecture on Wed.
I look forward to meeting all of you!
Regards, JP Ketchum