In the past week I have been writing my first print story for my Online Journalism class. The story will be published on The Miami Hurricane later this year. While I have become accustomed to express my views in my blog, actual news writing is something almost entirely new to me.
Since I had not had any training in news writing before this semester, I knew that for my story to be a success I would have to think and write differently. This was a challenge for me, but at the same time I was excited about learning how to communicate to a wider audience.
I have still only learned the basics of this form of writing, but I already feel a lot better equipped for my next story. The things that I learned now seem like a matter of course to me, but it was not that obvious to me to begin with.
I started by gathering the information I needed for the story from the relevant persons. This included interviews and reporting from a concert.
Having gathered the information and material needed, I then tried to get an overview of the different pieces that would make up the story. First I wrote down all the quotes and important information I thought would tell the story in the best way. Then I arranged everything in the order that made best sense to me.
Having done this I could start writing the actual story. I knew that I would probably make many mistakes, but there was only one way to develop my writing skills – by writing! Luckily my professor had agreed to work with me on several drafts of the story before it would be published.
After the first draft I had to rewrite much of the story. I was happy to do this because I could see that making the necessary changes would make my story much stronger. Not being accustomed to news writing I had left out key elements to the story, which I incorporated in the second draft.
My third draft has yet to be completed and of course some changes still need to be made. And again, I am happy to do so because I want to tell my story in the best possible way. I think the people I am writing about deserve that and so do the many people who hopefully will read and learn from my first news story. Most importantly, however, I want to become better at reporting beacuse I simply love it!
Friday, March 28, 2008
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
War Propaganda
Recently I posted a blog about an interview with CNN Chief International Correspondent, Christiane Amanpour I saw on tv. It seemed that she somehow felt that bloggers and citizen journalists were doing news telling a disfavor by their mere presence in the media landscape.
While this may be true in some aspects, let us not forget one thing: Being on the spot when news occurs does not automatically mean that the reporting is good, let alone objective. Last week I watched a movie in one of my classes that dealt with how the United States government has used propaganda in, before, and after, times of war ever since the Vietnam War. The film is called “War Made Easy” and I can recommend it to anyone interested in propaganda in politics.
Interestingly, in this movie Amanpour admitted that mainstream media basically were fooled by the government before and during the invasion of Iraq. “We were intimidated by the administration, she said.” At the time it seemed that most news media were afraid of being critical towards the war. Like most American people they were afraid of being viewed as un-American.
And why was that you might ask. I think that a lot of it has to do with an administration that is very skilled at spreading propaganda. In fact, what was supposed to be independent news outlets turned in to propaganda machines for the administration at this time and those reporters who dared to be critical had their shows cancelled.
During the course of the Iraq war we have seen journalists reporting directly from the battle field. Journalists are now closer to the action than ever before. This trend of having journalists embedded with American troops first occurred during the Vietnam War. The problem with this kind of reporting is that although the journalist might be close to the line of action he or she is only telling one side of the story. How impartial do you think a journalist who is stationed with a bunch a American soldiers in a war is? Not very, is the correct answer.
So I guess what I am getting at is that we shouldn’t be fooled into thinking that supporting American troops means turning a blind eye to the other side of the story. Especially when the other side is right. Nor should journalists who spend weeks with American soldiers in Iraq automatically be considered impartial to the conflict. Many of them are just instruments for the propaganda that all governments try to spread during a war.
While this may be true in some aspects, let us not forget one thing: Being on the spot when news occurs does not automatically mean that the reporting is good, let alone objective. Last week I watched a movie in one of my classes that dealt with how the United States government has used propaganda in, before, and after, times of war ever since the Vietnam War. The film is called “War Made Easy” and I can recommend it to anyone interested in propaganda in politics.
Interestingly, in this movie Amanpour admitted that mainstream media basically were fooled by the government before and during the invasion of Iraq. “We were intimidated by the administration, she said.” At the time it seemed that most news media were afraid of being critical towards the war. Like most American people they were afraid of being viewed as un-American.
And why was that you might ask. I think that a lot of it has to do with an administration that is very skilled at spreading propaganda. In fact, what was supposed to be independent news outlets turned in to propaganda machines for the administration at this time and those reporters who dared to be critical had their shows cancelled.
During the course of the Iraq war we have seen journalists reporting directly from the battle field. Journalists are now closer to the action than ever before. This trend of having journalists embedded with American troops first occurred during the Vietnam War. The problem with this kind of reporting is that although the journalist might be close to the line of action he or she is only telling one side of the story. How impartial do you think a journalist who is stationed with a bunch a American soldiers in a war is? Not very, is the correct answer.
So I guess what I am getting at is that we shouldn’t be fooled into thinking that supporting American troops means turning a blind eye to the other side of the story. Especially when the other side is right. Nor should journalists who spend weeks with American soldiers in Iraq automatically be considered impartial to the conflict. Many of them are just instruments for the propaganda that all governments try to spread during a war.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Copyrights.
One of the most difficult areas of any form of communication is dealing with and understanding copyright laws of intellectual property. And it seems that, even for lawyers, the rules are not crystal clear. Sam Tirilli, who is a lawyer and a professor at the University of Miami, spoke to my Online Journalism class about this issue, yesterday.
At the core of the debate about intellectual property copyrights is the understanding of the difference between physical and non-physical objects and how they are distributed. A digital file can be duplicated an infinite number of times without the original piece of work being harmed, removed, or altered in any way. At the same time all the digital copies will be as good as the original, or at least they will be if copied correctly. This is a major change from the days of VHS. Whereas a movie copied onto video tape looses some of its quality, a digitally copied movie does not.
When discrepancies over the use of copyrighted material end up going to court, two acts serve as the guidelines for judges. These are The Digital Millennium Rights Act of 2002 and The Communication Decency Act of 1996. Of course any trial is a very complex matter, and this is a simplification.
What these acts do is place liability when the rules of copyrights or defamation are violated. The Digital Millennium Rights Act of 2002 frees providers of online space of any liability for law infringements users not associated with the company might cause. If YouTube, for instance, does not know that copyrighted material unrightfully has been uploaded to their space, they are not to blame for it. However, the copyright holder can tell them to remove the material and then they will have to do so. But until then, they are protected by The Digital Millennium Rights Act.
Though most of The Communication Decency Act of 1996 was deemed unconstitutional, one section was passed. This section, Section 2.30, is central to many types of websites' existence. This section states that internet providers are immune when it comes to what other people post on their sites. If someone writes defamatory remarks about you, you therefore should go after the person writing it and not the site hosting it. While Section 2.30 allows many websites of questionable substance or relevance to survive and strive the act also protects people from liability in cases where they have no control over the substance on their sites.
Both acts are pivotal to the way these kinds of cases are being determined. And with good reason, I would argue. It is impossible for this site; Blogger, for instance, to check all the blogs daily for defamatory material or copyright infringements.
At the core of the debate about intellectual property copyrights is the understanding of the difference between physical and non-physical objects and how they are distributed. A digital file can be duplicated an infinite number of times without the original piece of work being harmed, removed, or altered in any way. At the same time all the digital copies will be as good as the original, or at least they will be if copied correctly. This is a major change from the days of VHS. Whereas a movie copied onto video tape looses some of its quality, a digitally copied movie does not.
When discrepancies over the use of copyrighted material end up going to court, two acts serve as the guidelines for judges. These are The Digital Millennium Rights Act of 2002 and The Communication Decency Act of 1996. Of course any trial is a very complex matter, and this is a simplification.
What these acts do is place liability when the rules of copyrights or defamation are violated. The Digital Millennium Rights Act of 2002 frees providers of online space of any liability for law infringements users not associated with the company might cause. If YouTube, for instance, does not know that copyrighted material unrightfully has been uploaded to their space, they are not to blame for it. However, the copyright holder can tell them to remove the material and then they will have to do so. But until then, they are protected by The Digital Millennium Rights Act.
Though most of The Communication Decency Act of 1996 was deemed unconstitutional, one section was passed. This section, Section 2.30, is central to many types of websites' existence. This section states that internet providers are immune when it comes to what other people post on their sites. If someone writes defamatory remarks about you, you therefore should go after the person writing it and not the site hosting it. While Section 2.30 allows many websites of questionable substance or relevance to survive and strive the act also protects people from liability in cases where they have no control over the substance on their sites.
Both acts are pivotal to the way these kinds of cases are being determined. And with good reason, I would argue. It is impossible for this site; Blogger, for instance, to check all the blogs daily for defamatory material or copyright infringements.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Are blogs merely distractions?
During Spring Break I watched a very interesting interview with The CNN Chief International Correspondent, Christiane Amanpour. She was talking to a university crowd about the state of news reporting.
What really caught my attention was when the audience was allowed to ask the questions. One student asked Amanpour about her thoughts on what has been termed citizen journalism. Her response made me think about the difference between reporting news from all over the world and writing about it in the security of your own home, after someone else has brought an issue to your attention.
The essence of what Amanpour said was that while citizen journalism has its moments, most of it serves as distractions from what “the real news” is. It seems that she views citizen journalism as interfering with the type of news coverage she does and I can see her point. As a trained and highly qualified journalist you obviously are critical of blogs that often merely present one person’s interpretation of a news story. However, if you choose to see much of citizen journalism as a supplement to “the real news” I still would argue that it does more good than harm. It all simply comes down to being critical of any information you are presented with.
Another point Amanpour made was that citizen journalism seldom has broken any big stories. Again I see where Amanpour, a journalist who has travelled the world, is coming from. No one sitting in front of their laptop in an American suburb can really know what is going on in Africa at that time. However a blogger who actually is in Africa at that time can, and maybe he or she can even get the story out before a big network like CNN.
I think that we still have to regard most of citizen journalism as a commentary to the news more than the news itself. And as a commentary or supplement I think we are doing pretty well.
What really caught my attention was when the audience was allowed to ask the questions. One student asked Amanpour about her thoughts on what has been termed citizen journalism. Her response made me think about the difference between reporting news from all over the world and writing about it in the security of your own home, after someone else has brought an issue to your attention.
The essence of what Amanpour said was that while citizen journalism has its moments, most of it serves as distractions from what “the real news” is. It seems that she views citizen journalism as interfering with the type of news coverage she does and I can see her point. As a trained and highly qualified journalist you obviously are critical of blogs that often merely present one person’s interpretation of a news story. However, if you choose to see much of citizen journalism as a supplement to “the real news” I still would argue that it does more good than harm. It all simply comes down to being critical of any information you are presented with.
Another point Amanpour made was that citizen journalism seldom has broken any big stories. Again I see where Amanpour, a journalist who has travelled the world, is coming from. No one sitting in front of their laptop in an American suburb can really know what is going on in Africa at that time. However a blogger who actually is in Africa at that time can, and maybe he or she can even get the story out before a big network like CNN.
I think that we still have to regard most of citizen journalism as a commentary to the news more than the news itself. And as a commentary or supplement I think we are doing pretty well.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Meta-video Tutorials.
Last night I was looking for information on how to edit avi.-files in Windows Movie Maker. My Google-search directed me to user generated threads, company FAQ’s, and to YouTube.
Videos about how to do almost anything are widely available at video sites like YouTube. And some of the most useful how-to-do’s are computer tutorials. They are extremely convenient and you can gain the expertise or knowledge you are looking for in just minutes.
First you go to the video site or any search engine and type the name of the application you are having problems with and add the word tutorial. Of course you can also type the name of your specific problem, narrowing your search. Hit enter and choose your tutorial.
Then you watch and listen to the tutorial on your computer. What is really smart is that you can use the application you are learning about at the same time. So you are actually not just learning by listening and paying close attention. You are learning by doing, while being guided. And anytime you want to; restart the tutorial, pause it, or go to the next one.
Most of the tutorials, and often the most useful ones, are created by users like you. Companies post their own tutorials about their programs, but user created tutorials tend to address the potential problems within each application better. Tutorials created by the company actually selling the application naturally do not focus as much on potential problems and sometimes look more like advertisements than tutorials.
Of course finding the right tutorial can require some patience. Since there are many tutorials for each application you might have to check out a couple before you get the answer you were looking for. However, even the ones that do not answer your exact question will probably teach you something new about the application.
Last night, when I was searching for a tutorial on avi.-files in Movie maker, the tutorial I watched didn’t actually address my problem. It turned out that it was not a tutorial about how to edit avi.-files in Movie Maker, the tutorial itself was an avi.-file. This is a good example of one of the problems that might occur when looking for the right tutorial.
Even though the tutorial did not address my specific problem I did find out things about Movie Maker, that I did not know before. And it appears that Movie Maker is just not created to handle avi.-files. And what a shame that the program cannot handle these files. Movie maker comes with most new Windows computers and would be the easiest for anyone with a pc to use.
Granted, it is not as extensive as other applications, but it would serve my needs right now…And I would be able to do my editing from home. But in stead I will have to use the iMovie and Final Cut Pro applications, that are available at my school. At least until Windows decides to release an avi.-codec for Movie Maker.
Videos about how to do almost anything are widely available at video sites like YouTube. And some of the most useful how-to-do’s are computer tutorials. They are extremely convenient and you can gain the expertise or knowledge you are looking for in just minutes.
First you go to the video site or any search engine and type the name of the application you are having problems with and add the word tutorial. Of course you can also type the name of your specific problem, narrowing your search. Hit enter and choose your tutorial.
Then you watch and listen to the tutorial on your computer. What is really smart is that you can use the application you are learning about at the same time. So you are actually not just learning by listening and paying close attention. You are learning by doing, while being guided. And anytime you want to; restart the tutorial, pause it, or go to the next one.
Most of the tutorials, and often the most useful ones, are created by users like you. Companies post their own tutorials about their programs, but user created tutorials tend to address the potential problems within each application better. Tutorials created by the company actually selling the application naturally do not focus as much on potential problems and sometimes look more like advertisements than tutorials.
Of course finding the right tutorial can require some patience. Since there are many tutorials for each application you might have to check out a couple before you get the answer you were looking for. However, even the ones that do not answer your exact question will probably teach you something new about the application.
Last night, when I was searching for a tutorial on avi.-files in Movie maker, the tutorial I watched didn’t actually address my problem. It turned out that it was not a tutorial about how to edit avi.-files in Movie Maker, the tutorial itself was an avi.-file. This is a good example of one of the problems that might occur when looking for the right tutorial.
Even though the tutorial did not address my specific problem I did find out things about Movie Maker, that I did not know before. And it appears that Movie Maker is just not created to handle avi.-files. And what a shame that the program cannot handle these files. Movie maker comes with most new Windows computers and would be the easiest for anyone with a pc to use.
Granted, it is not as extensive as other applications, but it would serve my needs right now…And I would be able to do my editing from home. But in stead I will have to use the iMovie and Final Cut Pro applications, that are available at my school. At least until Windows decides to release an avi.-codec for Movie Maker.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Preliminary research.
This week I am preparing to write my first feature story, which will eventually be published on themiamihurricane.com. There are several steps I have needed to take before doing the actual story and I would just like to share them with you here:
1. First I needed to find something to write about, obviously. My story is going to be about music. Since my audience will mostly be UM students, I thought I would do it on Cane Records, the record company of The University of Miami. So I started asking people I knew what they thought about the idea. I soon found out that that story had already been written, recently. Good thing I asked, though. Otherwise I might have ended up doing a story, which really would not hold any news value.
2. Then I thought about doing my story on one of the university bands. I hadn’t really heard about any of them, but had just been invited to a release party for one of them; a Cane Records’ artists called Les. So I went to the release party and thought that I might do my story on Les. Then today I checked the web for information about him. I found out that he is an r’n’b singer from Miami, things I already knew. What I didn’t know was that The Miami Hurricane, just yesterday, published a full story about him…Damn! But again, I was glad I did some research before actually starting the story.
3. Earlier today I called one of my friends, who also happens to be working for Cane records, and asked him if he had any ideas on an interesting band. He did have some suggestions for my story that didn’t seem too far fetched. I also checked with Greg Linch who put me in contact with the music guy at The Miami Hurricane. You will be able to read my story sometime in the near future. Where and when, I will be sure to let you know.
The essence of what I want to tell you, through my own experiences, is that doing preliminary research is essential in journalism. The web is a great place to find background information, story ideas, and to double check sources. Just make sure that your story hasn’t just been published by someone else. Even as important, if not more, are the people around you; your colleagues, friends, family, professors, and other students. They will tell you if you, to their knowledge, are moving in the right direction with a story. Never be too proud to listen to good advice!
1. First I needed to find something to write about, obviously. My story is going to be about music. Since my audience will mostly be UM students, I thought I would do it on Cane Records, the record company of The University of Miami. So I started asking people I knew what they thought about the idea. I soon found out that that story had already been written, recently. Good thing I asked, though. Otherwise I might have ended up doing a story, which really would not hold any news value.
2. Then I thought about doing my story on one of the university bands. I hadn’t really heard about any of them, but had just been invited to a release party for one of them; a Cane Records’ artists called Les. So I went to the release party and thought that I might do my story on Les. Then today I checked the web for information about him. I found out that he is an r’n’b singer from Miami, things I already knew. What I didn’t know was that The Miami Hurricane, just yesterday, published a full story about him…Damn! But again, I was glad I did some research before actually starting the story.
3. Earlier today I called one of my friends, who also happens to be working for Cane records, and asked him if he had any ideas on an interesting band. He did have some suggestions for my story that didn’t seem too far fetched. I also checked with Greg Linch who put me in contact with the music guy at The Miami Hurricane. You will be able to read my story sometime in the near future. Where and when, I will be sure to let you know.
The essence of what I want to tell you, through my own experiences, is that doing preliminary research is essential in journalism. The web is a great place to find background information, story ideas, and to double check sources. Just make sure that your story hasn’t just been published by someone else. Even as important, if not more, are the people around you; your colleagues, friends, family, professors, and other students. They will tell you if you, to their knowledge, are moving in the right direction with a story. Never be too proud to listen to good advice!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
