There it is!

Gather 'round, people...My first website has now landed. And this time it is not just a shared website or a profile on some internet community, but my own real website where I’ll be posting information about myself in different media.

As of right now the only media posted is a picture and some text, but come next week you should at least be seeing a new layout and a soundslide on there. And it’s all going to be about myself and who I perceive myself to be.

Not the most interesting topic in the world, you might say…Well, to you maybe. But I, as an object of attention, actually do manage to hold my own interest for quite some time.

So for all of you who, like myself, have been following my blog every Tuesday and Friday, for the last couple of months; you now can see just who I am, if you don’t already know. And for those of you not interested, well you know what to do too.

So I guess everyone is happy. At least I know I am, and with Spring Break coming up I can't really find a reason not to be. I hope everyone is ok with me just talking about myself in my blog, for once. I promise to get back to the more serious online journalsim stuff in my next blog.

Also, I'll let you know when something exciting happens on my website. Untill then just sit back and continue to enjoy the many interesting blogs from the Comm. School students at UM.

Immediacy Vs. depth.

Mainstream media and especially television and radio are very good at bringing breaking news. A TV-channel can cover an event, as it is happening, with just one cameraman at the scene. And TV-channels have many years of experience telling us when something worth paying attention to is happening. The perfect example of the impact of live news is, of course, CNN’s coverage of the 9/11 attacks.

Immediacy is one of the best reasons to follow live news on TV and radio. An argument often heard about the advantages of TV compared to newspapers is that, what you read in the newspaper is already old news when you pick it up. Another advantage of TV and radio is that you can do other things while listening to them. You can turn on the radio in the morning and basically it will tell you that the world is still turning/burning while you brush your teeth. No effort or time involved.

Live broadcasts from breaking events always draw many viewers and listeners. However, often times, when an issue is no longer considered breaking news the media will let go of it, without following up on the situation. This tendency creates a faulty image of the world for audiences who get all their news from TV. This is especially true for negative news coverage. Since much of what is covered by mainstream news focuses on the negative, people start to see the world around them as a very scary place. And of course the world can be a scary place. But the media often forgets to tell the positive stories that do occur. And I am not talking about a cute short story about a police officer rescuing a cat from a tree, at the end of the program.

Newspapers, however, do a much better job of making sure to cover as many aspects of an event as possible. After the 9/11 attacks, newspapers told the readers about the rebuilding and how people were coping with their losses, while TV slowly moved on to the next breaking story. And this is just an example of the differences in coverage. Short term coverage is the main focus of TV while newspapers take a long term approach.

Luckily with the emergence of the web as a place to get your news and report about the world as you see it, audiences have an abundance of news sources available to them. However, the old lady who does not have a computer still has only two options: TV/radio and newspapers. And if she chooses only to follow the news on TV it is understandable that she is scared to leave her house.

Free speech?

Should you say or do something just because you can? Maybe just to demonstrate your right to express anything that comes to mind. Or perhaps to demonstrate that, in western democracies, nothing is sacred. I guess both reasons are valid ones, so yeah, maybe you should. Sometimes you do need to provoke others in order to make people think. Occasionally, the best way to get a reaction from people is to step on a toe or two. And after all, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are fundamental rights in any democracy.

But does that mean that you should flash your inherent power to insult anyone you want, whenever you feel like it? And is it justifiable to do so repeatedly? I think that while journalists are obligated to push freedom of speech and freedom of the press, you should always put things into context. A possible insult can serve as a means to an end, but should never become and end in (and of?) itself.

What I am referring to is some Danish newspapers’ publication of drawings of the prophet Mohammed in 2005, which led to great commotion across the Muslim world. Soon, other western countries were publishing the same drawings, all while the Danish flag was being burnt in the Middle East and parts of Asia.

No one could have anticipated the reaction that followed the publication of the drawings and luckily all the commotion died down as time went on. It wasn’t a case of two parties settling on a common ground, but more of a truce-situation. Nor could any agreement on freedom of expression be expected between fundamentalist fractions of Islam and western governments and news organizations. But at least things had gone back to ‘normal’ for a while.

So why would you want to go and publish those same drawings two years later? Was it to celebrate the annual “Piss-Muslims-off day” or to demonstrate the joys of free speech? Whatever the reason, let’s just be happy that things didn’t escalade to the same heights of anger around the world this time.

The Civil Rights Media Panel.

Yesterday, students and anyone else interested had the rare opportunity of hearing first hand accounts from the civil rights struggle in Miami.

As part of Communication Week at The School of Communication at UM, the five speakers of The Civil Rights Media Panel shared their experiences with those present. The speakers all play/played a part in the struggle for racial equality in the news media in Southern Florida. They helped pave the way for coming generations of journalists of all ethnicities.

Garth Reeves, former editor of Miami’s African American newspaper, The Miami Times, and C. T. Taylor, the first black reporter for Channel 4, shared some very vivid stories from their struggles. They were stories about segregation and the pursuit of dreams.

As the son of H. E. Sigismund Reeves, founder of The Miami Times, Garth Reeves was born into the newspaper business. However, it was not until after he had served his country that he realized he wanted to go into journalism. In the beginning he, “took a back seat and was happy to go along until things started to change”. He soon discovered that he should not have to endure the injustices he had put up with his whole life.

Reeves then started helping the NAACP in their fight for justice, although he had to be careful what he printed in the paper. After the Miami Times successfully helped desegregate Crandon Park, they knew they could not throw the story on the front page as they wanted to. At the time, being a black journalist meant watching not to step over the line set by the rest of society.

The story that marked a turning point in Reeves’ reporting was when he exposed the then chief of police, Walter Headley. Headley was known to place evidence at crime scenes and was a blatant racist. As Reeves says, Headley was “the Bull Connor of Miami”, referring to the infamous police chief from Birmingham, Alabama.

C. T. Taylor had wanted to become a radio announcer since he was a child. He held on to his dream even though family members told him, “you will never become a radio announcer”. In 1968 Taylor was hired at a radio station as a maintenance worker. He learned how to operate radio equipment by watching the DJs while mopping the floors of the studios. And one day, by dumb luck, he was offered a chance to go on air himself. This chance, which had only been offered to him because another DJ was too drunk to do his job, ended up making C. T. Taylor the most popular DJ in Miami.

During the Arthur McDuffy-riots in 1980, White reporters were afraid to report from the hot zone. Mainstream television media were in desperate need of African American reporters like Taylor, whom they had earlier declined to hire. During the riots, Taylor received a phone call from a TV station who wanted to hire him as a cameraman. Without any training, Taylor was sent to report from the riots equipped with a 16 mm. camera. While he was sent out to report, he was never allowed to be in front of the camera. However, he deliberately let his hand, then ear, and soon the back of his head slide into the frame, making it obvious to viewers that the TV station had hired a black reporter.

When Channel 4 learned that the rival station had hired an African American reporter, they instantly contacted Taylor, who had left an application with them earlier. He soon found himself on screen and on air at Channel 4, as the first African American.

Having entered the news media by means of challenging the status quo, both Garth Reeves and C. T. Taylor were successful due to their dedication and sometimes odd coincidence. The message from these two reporters and the other panelists, who are all pioneers, can best be summarized in the words of C. T. Taylor. “Race doesn’t matter, report the facts!” Having dealt with incorrect representations of Black history by the news media, these reporters know the importance of reporting the truth better than anyone.

Journalism 2.0 and beyond.

By now, everyone pretty much agrees that the internet has brought about huge advantages to reporters and audience alike. From the beginning it has been obvious that the new technology would somehow redefine journalism. But just what role this new tool should have, has been the issue of much debate. The visionaries, who saw the benefits of multimedia reporting early on, have had to fight a tough battle in many newsrooms, within the last decade. Transforming tradition bound newspapers to multimedia websites has meant that reporters have had to be taught to use new technologies...Ones that didn't exist when they first chose to become journalists. Changing the tools of the trade and the qualifications required naturally has caused some anxiety and resistance.

Fortunately this resistance has diminished as it has become evident that the internet is not just a fad. Many senior reporters have been reschooled by now and have become strong advocates for multimedia reporting. Furthermore, many young reporters have grown up with the internet and view it is a natural way of communicating with an audience.

In the words of Phil Lewis, Editor & Vice President of Editorial at Naples Daily News, multimedia reporting was "way down the assembly line" just a few years ago. He has been a key figure in changing this mentality at the local paper. He sees the possibilities of multimedia reporting as being immense for any newspaper. Interestingly he emphasizes the importance of using the web to stream live video to audiences. Cable TV stations need a license to broadcast news and they often do not have very many reporters. This offers a great advantage to papers, even small ones like Naples Daily News. They have a large variety of reporters working for them, full time and free-lance. And transmitting via the web saves them having to obtain an expensive broadcast license. Of course the opportunity of streaming via the web is not exclusive to papers. But since many papers have a large staff they have the manpower and expertise to truly challenge TV stations.

Just a few years back, a newspaper journalist had a narrowly defined job description. While it is still important to have expertise in one or several areas of news reporting, reporters are now expected to have a diversified range of skills. And with digital technology available to reporters it is becoming easier to obtain the necessary skills. While news will remain news production of news will continue to change with new technologies. Therefore it is essential to keep up to date with technologies and embrace new ideas and ways of conveying information.

Putting yourself out there.

Are you out there?...I mean are you really putting yourself out there? Are you letting people know who you are and why it is best to be exactly the way YOU are and not something else?

Questions like these are ones that I have been asking myself in the last week or so. Trying to create a slideshow presentation of myself, as an aspiring journalist, I wanted to make it as compelling as possible. It is always a good thing to reflect on who you are and why, both professionally and personally...And not least, who you want to be. It can be difficult to come up with answers to those questions, but most people have an idea of who they (think they) are. How best to convey what you want a specific audience to know about you is the tricky part.

If you consider yourself a modest person, much like me, it is not easy to write a presentation of yourself. However, in this day and age, it is becoming increasingly important to be able to put yourself out there. The days of the resume are gone and it's time to get creative. You really don't have any excuse not to take advantage of the possibilities new technologies offer in terms of new ways to present yourself.

And haven't we all been portraying ourselves in different ways for a while by now?...Just think about your profile and how it changes depending on who your audience is. Your Facebook profile is different from your MySpace profile, which again differs from the information you put on your LinkedIn profile etc....

But while audiences change, you have to keep in mind that any audience probably can find all of your profiles just by Googleing you. Therefore you should make sure that one profile does not contradict another. Rather, they should complement each other by creating a diverse yet coherent image of yourself.

Digital Photography

I remember when I visited the US Senate in 2002, I was surprised to find that the journalists there had all switched to digital cameras. I talked to the Senate’s Head of Media, who told me that they had just done so, all across the board. Six years ago this was really a new thing…Well, at least to me.

As with news writing, photography has also changed in the digital age. And, as with news writing many things remain the same. Digital photography has, obviously, become the standard in online journalism, but also in traditional newspapers. While some photographers still prefer film because of artistic or sentimental reasons, the advantages of digital has persuaded most to switch.

The advantages of digital are easy to recognize. The freedom of being able to edit photos on your laptop saves a lot of time, not to mention being able to see your pictures right away. However, photography is still photography and a good picture is still a good picture. The rule of threes, which has its origin in paintings, also applies to modern photography. I guess the aesthetics do not change just because technology does.

Since pictures have now been reduced to files, it is important to save your pictures in the right image size. Large files take a long time to load, so you should always resize images to make them fit on a webpage. Photoshop is a good tool for editing and resizing. It is fun to use and it allows you to really enhance your pictures significantly. Photos for print newspapers need to be of a better resolution than those for the web. The wonderful thing about digital photography is that if you just remember to save your original you can edit it and resize it as many times as you want.

When taking pictures you need to think about framing, the position of your object, and the angle from which you take the picture. While editing can do many things, you - the photographer, still need to apply the basic rules of what a good picture is, when shooting.

Your daily supplement...

Citizen journalism is a term you often meet when reading blogs, and especially when reading blogs about blogs (like this one). So what exactly is the role of citizen journalists? The answer is that the roles are many and it is ultimately up to the individual person to define their own role(s).

In the ongoing presidential primary elections it seems that more people, than in earlier years, especially students, are letting their voices be heard. It is becoming increasingly easy for anyone with a computer and an internet connection to express how they feel about a given issue. So the question is not so much “Should I give voice to my beliefs?”, but rather “How do I best give voice to my beliefs?”. The internet and new media have gradually legitimized the participation of non-experts in political agendas. The people are really letting their voices be heard. If you think there is a void and you have what it takes to fill it out, you are almost obligated to do so. The skeptic would argue that it has become difficult to distinguish solid journalism from unfounded arguments made by the guy next door. I would argue that it is not difficult at all.

Everything depends on where you get your information from and how critical you are. Since most people still do get their news from established news organizations they are not in any immediate danger of being misled. And most citizen journalism actually does the opposite…Offers a new perspective on things or informs people about issues that have been ignored or filtered out by mainstream media. And as with any information, you should never believe everything you read.

It is this blogger’s firm conviction that it, in reality, is quite easy for the modern citizen, equipped with a good sense of judgment, to distinguish facts from fiction. And with the possibilities of the internet we even have the possibility of researching the facts for ourselves. When it comes down to it what online journalism is offering, right now, is a supplement to the old media landscape more than an actual change of the old media.

One example of an organization giving people the opportunity to get more into the detail, and to express themselves, is "Scoop 08". It is an initiative for and by students nationwide who are interested in the ongoing primaries. On their website "Scoop 08" offers information about the politics of the different parties and candidates. And not just the leading ones…Scoop 08 prides itself on trying to cover the election from as many angles as possible, whereas the two main parties pretty much are all you hear about on tv. And the best part about it is that if you disagree and think that their coverage is not as it should be, you are welcome to join their team and help diversifying the debate.

The News of Tomorrow.

When we talk about online journalism, or even blogs of the more serious kind, it is important to stress the fact that we are still dealing with journalism. The code of ethics that apply to journalists and a good sense of news judgment are key to keeping the standards up, also in online journalism. Since anyone can post something online and label it "online journalism" it becomes even more essential, to the individual blogger or journalist, to differentiate him or herself from the mob of less than good writers out there. You want your readers to take you seriously, and they will only do so if you follow the basic rules of journalism.

As far as language and grammar goes, you just cannot make mistakes, if you want to be taken seriously. No matter how well you research or how vividly your, by the way very interesting, story is told you need to write in a fluent and correct language. As a new blogger it is easy to fall into the pit of using IM language. After all, this is how you normally communicate online, with your friends and peers. For some blogs that type of language is accepted, or perhaps even expected some times. But journalistic blogs should not use the same language as blogs about celebrities, for instance. One good reason for this is that in any type of news writing you need to be precise and concise. There is simply no room for weak or ambiguous statements.

However, in many aspects news writing online does differ from that of the printed media. With new possibilities obviously come new standards of doing things and new responsibilities. One rule that is predominant in any way of conveying news is the paradigm of "content is king". That being said the issue of urgency and time, that dominates online journalism, is somewhat in contrast to using a lot of time to check your story with several sources before pressing the post button. Therefore a good rule is to post what you know to be the facts about a given story as soon as you can. You can always add to the story later, when you have confirmed other facts.

The internet allows anyone with a computer to read what you are writing about. This dramatically changes your potential audience. According to Suzanne Levinson, Director of Site Operations of The Miami Herald, their online audience largely consists of readers from outside Miami. All of 80% of the audience of The Miami Herald's online edition do not live in Miami. People from all over the world can follow local news anywhere they wish and according to Suzanne Levinson a large percentage of the readers from out of town and out of state go to their site to read about The Miami Dolphins. Google searches are a major factor in directing Dolphins fans from all over the world to The Miami Herald.

Although many aspects of journalism remain the same, online journalism is redefining standards as the frontier of the news of today and tomorrow.