Mediation

Will Congress Be The Knight in Shining Armor?

hmchale — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:06:05 +0000

Through heavy observation of the news industry this semester (in this class and others) I am realizing that we are experiencing what will be a historical benchmark in American journalism. It is not the first time in history that people are nervous about the future of journalism, but it is the first time that this concern has been validated by an industry that is crashing and burning as we speak.

In this article found on PoynterOnline, author Bill Mitchell paints a picture of what could happen if Congress decides to step in and help the journalism industry (this is an idea that the government has been toying with for a while now). The idea of Congress helping, in itself, is a historical turning point for journalism because it contradicts a value that is part of the foundation of American journalism; independence. However, this article outlines some enlightening ways that Congress could help to preserve news consumption without directly lending aid to news companies.

How do you guys feel about being part of this turning point in journalism? Have you thought about it before?

What are some ways that you think Congress could help preserve or improve news consumption?

Do you think that Congress helping the news industry will have serious implications/consequences as far as journalistic independence is concerned?

A Gutsy Decision

enoel — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:52:00 +0000

We get it. All forms of media are, or should be, making the switch from print to web. This Washington Post article, however, describes one guy who might not have gotten the memo. Blurt Magazine publisher Scott Crawford has made the decision to remove his magazine from the web and turn it into print form.

This would be a bold choice right now for any medium. However, for this magazine it seems especially absurd. Blurt’s focus is the music world, especially unknown, upcoming artists. These days, it seems like everything you would need to know about new artists would be on the web. In my opinion, not many people will be rushing to the newsstands for this magazine.

Though Crawford says this magazine’s print form will become a best seller at the newsstand…I have to disagree. Feel free to blurt out your own thoughts if you disagree.

Chicago Tribune Cuts

mheyblom — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 04:37:44 +0000

In an article from the Chicago Tribune’s blog entitled, “Tower Ticker”, Phil Rosenthal lets the public know about the layoffs that occurred today in Tribune Tower. Editor Gerould Kern laid off 53 editorial employees today in hopes to cut down on costs and save money. The news room is now down to 430 employees and it is rumored that by the end of summer almost half of that number will be gone.

“We are navigating through the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. We are weathering a fundamental disruption in the media business model. We will meet these challenges by acting resolutely to win here in Chicago.” Kern said in his note to his employees. I think that he is handling the situation in the best possible manner; it would be a challenging position to be stuck in.

Journalists at the Tribune are trying to implemate new skills and resources in order to maintain a position. Standing out from the rest of the team is what keeps you in the game. Another rumor going around the Tower is that the Tribune will go completely online in the next two to three years. I suppose time will tell.

Street Wise

L.Gerber — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 03:12:21 +0000

After first announcing that Streetwise, was in danger of having to close. In articles from Chicago Tribune and Sun Times today, announced that Streetwise was able to get private donation to keep their paper going. For anyone who doesn’t know, Streetwise is sold be people on Michigan Avenue whom otherwise wouldn’t have a job. Does anyone know where the donations came from? Do you think companies like Tribune and the Sun Times could get funding from people who care enough about the cause?

The Obama’s image management and the Press

atello — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:09:53 +0000

As part of the public and a student of Communications, I have been intrigued by the Obama family since they became a household name. Barack and Michelle Obama exemplify the intellectual power-couple: sharp, poised, incredibly intelligent, and attractive. When Obama became president, this image became topics of conversation amongst journalist. Even the international media has become enamored of the Obama. In fact, according to an English journalist (name escapes me at the moment), the UK is in love with Michelle and her down-to-earth persona and her fashion sense.

The Chicago Tribune’s article on the Obama’s image took a different direction. While other articles praise and admire Barack and Michelle, the article by Peter Wallsten and Faye Fiore focuses on an alleged strategic move from the Lady Obama camp, including her Communications director. According to the artice, specific magazine articles, press conferences, and access to the White House from celebrity mags has been purposely pursued in order to shape the image of the President and the First Lady.

I agree that the Obama’s are larger than life, but how much is in keeping with the direction society is going and how much is it the Obamas wanting to win the American people and the world? Society is becoming more superficial and some read celebrity mags more than say Times or The Economists. Are they doing the right thing for managing their image in a way to reach even those that are not interested in American politics?

NY Times Still Struggling with Ad Revenue

mariea32 — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 03:48:30 +0000

According to an article from poynter.org, the New York Times Co. reported its ad revenues are down 27 percent.

“CEO Janet Robinson told analysts in an earnings conference call that early signs suggest the ad decline — which has now reached the company’s digital operations — will be just as bad in the second quarter.”

Despite these facts, the author of the article points out that the NY Times made a $19 million profit for the quarter. Still, the Times Co. owes close to $90 million in interest payments for the year.

The article continues, “In addition, this six-month period and the next will test whether some number of readers feel that getting the paper is a discretionary item — like restaurant meals — that should be cut back for family budget reasons in hard times.”

How do you feel about that comment regarding newspapers being a discretionary item during the recession? Do you agree that readership is down for this reason, or are there other possibilities?

AP Photo/Mark Lennihan

We Need your money so we will show your message in our show

atello — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:05:11 +0000

I was looking at past articles send to me from The NY Times and came across this intriguing article. According to the NY Times, the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation have negotiated with Viacom networks a unique trade off: the Gates foundation donates money for production of Viacom network shows in exchange for what else- socially conscious programming. Three shows mentioned were Law and Order: SVU, ER (an episode with George Clooney), and Private Practice. The foundation’s intention is to spread awareness on diseases, surgical safety, and HIV prevention. Great intentions, Mr. and Mrs. Gates. But what are the implications if philanthropic intentions are used to shape certain messages in television shows?

Throughout the years I have seen the decline of social values and even decency on television. I am not a prude but I grew up during a time when saying the b-word was beyond inappropriate and intimate scenes were not as salacious and suggestive as they are now. It is not a big deal to me but I am cognizant of the many young viewers out there exposed to mixed messages. Moreover, television shows used to have a message, they used to teach something. Nowadays, most of television shows are there to entertain and offer a good laugh.

I like the idea of injecting socially conscious messages in television shows (although by nature the aforementioned 3 shows already do so). However, I am weary at the Gates’ foundation use of money to do so. Is this a sign of a Brave New World? Are TV networks so desperate for money that they are willing to sacrifice their autonomy? What do you think?

Domino’s Pizza: Let’s See It!

kayciemcclure — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:39:09 +0000

The incriminating video of the Domino’s employees tampering with food has been removed from the internet for legal reasons. This infuriates me. The public has a right to see this footage, especially considering some of us are customers of the food chain. The media should inform citizens about such issues so they can make educated decisions about the goings-on of where they patronize their business and so they look out for themselves and their safety in general.

Journalism Schools’ New Approaches

kfield7 — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 15:34:52 +0000

Instead of just commenting of the dire state of journalism as a lot of articles do, I thought that this article from the New York Times was really interesting because it talked about what different journalism schools are doing to counteract newspapers dying out and give their students the tools to survive in their field.

The article starts out with the revelation that one professor from Arizona University had while teaching a class. He says that while he was giving a lecture one day he decided that he was teaching a history course to his journalism students, when what they really needed was a course about the business and future of journalism today. What do you think about this? Do you think it is better to forgo learning about journalism’s history in order to make room for classes about the future?

The article then goes on to talk about an interesting class at Arizona University in which, “students create products for news customers.” In this class something a student might do that they give as an example is build a website for a group of local filmmakers. They say that in this class they teach the students ways to “invent [their] own jobs, because they might have to.” What do you think about these approaches to teaching journalism as well as the other ones mentioned in the article? Will they help students be better prepared in the long run than a more traditional approach to journalism school?

BREAKING NEWS: Ashton Kutcher Beats CNN in Number of Twitter Followers!!!

KatherineM — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:49:26 +0000

This Poytner.org article discusses actor, Ashton Kutcher, and his ability to attain more than one million twitter followers, outnumbering the number of followers on CNN.com’s twitter page.

Firstly, why is this “breaking news” on poynter.org, a website dedicated to important journalism topics? This is the equivalent of Poynter running an article about myspace “celebrity” Tila Tequila hitting over a million friends. These topics are not news, they are nonsense.
While this article may be interesting to people as a result of the celebrity factor, this is by no means breaking news let alone news at all.
In truth, I feel that all this article proves is that celebrity gossip and entertainment news are more interesting to the public than real news provided by networks like CNN. This is saddening.

Any thoughts? Do you think this is legitimate “breaking news?”