Independence.

When I found out Jeff Cohen was attending class on Thursday to talk about independent media I really wasn't sure what to expect... Of course I have been exposed to many different sources of independent media, but I never really found a source that I went to to get my information from (I usually stick to the media giants like CNN, ABC, and NBC).   But after listening to his lecture I was fairly surprised... and intrigued.  So intrigued in fact, that I spent some time online research sites such as crooksandliars.com and The Huffington Post and found them to be just as viable, if not more, than traditional news sources. I thought Professor Cohen's presentation was fantastic and I hope more people will turn to independent media to get their information.

Objectivity? Or lack there of?

"To be objective is to adhere strictly to truth-conducive methods in one's thinking, particularly, to take into account all available information, and to avoid any form of prejudice, bias, or wishful thinking. The forms of observation and experimentation, and the canons of deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning employed by scientists practicing the verification guide scientists to be objective." - As according to Wikipedia... 

As students studying journalism we have been taught time and time again about this so-called 'objectivity" and how it is something that we should all strive for in our future professions. And as a student observing journalists in daily media I would have to say that very few journalists seem totally impartial in their own personal biases. News sources and programs themselves even seem to have their own biases. Whether it is downplaying bigger stories, isolating stories from each other, or fragmentating information the media needs to start re-thinking the meaning of objectivity and strive to give consumers facts without slanting in any one direction. 

Breaking it down...

The other day I commented on Barbara Walters and The View and how they asked Senator John McCain very important questions that were usually overlooked by other sources of media. Once again I would like to comment on another interview by them today, which was about the stock market. I have been following what is going on with all the major investment firms and banks for the past week in The Times, but I never understood the entire meaning of it all. The ladies of The View broke it down for everyone and asked the overlooked but simple questions of "what does this mean for average Americans?" etc. I think if the media broke things down more simply and explained it in terms that average people can understand more people will be less discouraged to turn away from the news and current events.

media fog

Candidates Strive to Break Through Media Fog

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/us/politics/16web-nagourney.html?hp

While browsing through the online version of the Times today, I navigated pass all the articles about the stock market and hurricane Ike, and came across this article about how Senator Obama and Senator McCain are struggling to get their messages out to American citizens. I thought this was interesting because it touched upon what we talked about in class a couple weeks back, which is the fact that the ability to create and send a message is becoming quite impossible because of all the sources of media. It seems that because of the wide variety of messages and information people are becoming discouraged and start to discount it all. The article talks traditional sources of news, such as newspapers, and how blogs seems to be taking some of their dominance in relaying information. Another thing the article talked about was the agenda of the media and how the candidates are frustrated with what information viewers are actually getting and what they are actually believing. I can understand the Senators' frustration with this dilemma because I myself find it hard to sort through all the messages to find out what is fact and what is fiction.

McCain's "View"

While reading, watching, and listening to the news this past week, one journalist's interview really stuck out to me. That was the interview of Senator John McCain by the ladies of The View, particulary that of Barbara Walters.  I found that the interview contained some of the tougher but very important questions that other sources of media fail to ask.  I wouldn't consider it "harsh" or even consider that McCain was "grilled" because I felt the questions were very necessary to the publics interests.  Even though not all of the questions were answered, I still feel like they sparked some sort of questions in the viewers minds. I wish more of the news media could incite so much interest to its viewers...

What was the agenda of the news today?

 While reading The NY Time's today I came across two stories that I found interesting. The first article, found on the front page, was about a legal hallucinogenic drug called salvia. The second article, found several pages back was about President Bush accepting the recommendation to reduce the number of troops in Iraq.   Both stories deal with the U.S. and both could potentially have influence on peoples lives... but is the drug story really more newsworthy than 8,000 troops getting pulled from Iraq??  In my opinion, no.  I wonder why the Times deemed the drug story as more worthy of a front page spot on the paper? It is newsworthy.. but what if that story had been published in a different section, or even published at a later date?  Would it have made a significant difference?  I would think not. I feel that the story about the troops is a more current issue and deserved to be a little more in the spotlight. 

Palin Speech

"And I've learned quickly these past few days that if you're not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I'm not going to Washington to seek their good opinion. I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country." 

Those were the words of Republican vice presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, Wednesday night at the Republican National Convention.  While listening to Palin’s speech at the convention and hearing this statement, I couldn’t help but ponder my own existence in the role of media.  On one side, I can understand where Palin is coming from.  Since she has entered the spotlight as McCain’s VP pick, questions, comments, and criticisms have been aimed at her left and right.  The fact that her un-wed 17 year-old daughter is pregnant seemed to have been where most of the discussion was coming.  I respect her in the sense that since that was a family issue it shouldn’t have been all over the media and shouldn’t have people questioning her ability to serve our country. On the other hand, as a journalist and a citizen of the U.S., I feel that it is my right to know about the potential future VP of the U.S. It is the job of the reporters and commentators to spark the public’s interest on someone who can hold such a powerful position in their country.  Another thing which I found interesting about Palin’s speech was the line where she talked about their “opinion.”  As a student of journalism, I am taught to keep my opinion out of things, in order to present a fair, balanced, and unbiased view of the news.  But I have to wonder why all journalists don’t follow that rule.  

Anderson Cooper talked about this on CNN tonight.. so of course I searched youtube for it. Pretty funny. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eneq0jcMlTw

The Agenda-Setting Role of the Mass Media in the Shaping of Public Opinion –Maxwell McCombs

““Throughout their day-by-day selection and display of the news, editors and news directors focus our attention and influence our perceptions on what are the most important issues of the day. Their ability to influence the salience of topics on the public agenda has come to be called the agenda setting role of the media.”

“ Newspapers and TV news, even the tightly edited pages of a tabloid newspaper or Internet website, do considerably more than signal the existence of major events and issues.”

  I believe that McCombs agenda-setting theory is something that all consumers of American news media should take into consideration.  If I had not been surrounded for the past few years and been pursuing a career in the news I probably would not have been thinking about these types of things. I feel that “some” and I say some, because I cannot speak for all, but that some just take their news for what it’s worth and never really question how and why news editors and news directors are influencing people’s perceptions on what the most important issues are.

Working in a newsroom over the summer, I saw first hand how easily news directors and producers can just simply take out a story and replace it with another one. While I know much deliberation goes into making the decisions to cut a story, it just goes to show how much power these people have over what the public hears or reads. 

The State Of The News Media 2008

"A good newspaper...is a nation talking to itself." -Arthur Miller, 1961

I chose this quote to start off my discussion about the ‘Year in the News’ article for two reasons.  First, because I agree with it; second, because I disagree with it.  As we are told in the article, the U.S. news agenda is usually centered on U.S. affairs.  We find things such as our elections and politics, our country’s crime, and our government to be the most covered topics in American media.   This is where I agree with the quote; a good newspaper, or news source in general, should and does discuss what the important issues of the time are.  But I disagree in the part that there are also other issues which the news does not seem to cover extensively, such as education, transportation, and the legal system.  If these things were brought to the nation’s attention and kept there I believe the nation would be having a better conversation with itself.