Meghan McCain's views of the GOP

Meghan McCain has been very vocal about her views of the Republican party and what changes she thinks they need to make in order to attract younger voters and become a respected entity again. She thinks by getting rid of the far right crazies such as Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Laura Ingraham, that the party would be better off.

Mainstream View

The Rachel Maddow Show: Meghan McCain on the GOP and Ann Coulter 3-11-09

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

While MSNBC as a company is conservative and the MS being Microsoft, which gave millions in order to help G.W. get reelected in 2004, the station itself is rebranding as a liberal alternative to Fox News. Rachel Maddow herself is a liberal, but I feel that she was very to the point and not overtly biased except for when she talks about Ann Coulter. Her facial expression goes from normal, to "woah, that girl is crazy" and her voice inflection even changes to reflect that as well. In the video there is a montage of McCain with her father on the campaign trail in the background during the introduction, then when the interview starts, a still image of the two is used with the words "like father, like daughter?" The story itself, even though Maddow says she doesn't want to be all Us Weekly, is just that. She started off building up the Ann Coulter diss McCain wrote on her blog, in typical gossip fashion, I could picture her saying, "oh no she didn't!" It reminded me very much of the CNN video we watched in class about Jon Stewart giving Jim Cramer the smack down.

Online View
Meghan McCain: The Millennial Voice of the GOP on Ology, a blog site for and by Millennials.
The blogger has a transparent liberal viewpoint and identifies with McCain's moderate agenda. The post tells of the facts of how McCain would like to see the party grow a larger youth base and her opinion that super conservatives are hindering this from happening, but in a way that seems like the writer is almost shocked that they have something in common with a Republican. Which is how I have found most liberals to react to McCain, myself included. The blog links to the Daily Beast (McCain's blog) and her Twitter account . The blog is also set up for user comments. The image used with the post is of McCain, presumably from the campaign trail with her father. She's smiling and wearing a weird pearl necklace with an Abraham Lincoln pendant.

And just for fun, a video from Current TV.

SuperNews: Jabba the Rush 3-28-09

Framing: School Bans Touching

I chose a video from CNN that covers a new policy implemented by East Shore Middle School in Milford, Connecticut. I found a corresponding article at the Eyewitness News in Connecticut. The story here was in text form and there is a picture of the school sign and a link to a video. This event was presented in two very different ways and it’s clear that framing alters how a story is perceived by the public.

The CNN video begins with a child being interviewed and there is no text version of the story connected to the video. For people who wanted more in depth coverage of the story, more research was required. In my opinion, only providing a video is framing in itself because the public is not provided with helpful links and there are important limitations to be mindful of. One being that videos must be short and to the point. This makes it hard to include all the important information or both sides of the story. In this case, only one side of the story is presented. Only children and their parents are interviewed and we are not told why we don’t hear the school’s side of the story. It is simply left out. By doing this, the audience has one take, a biased take, and therefore it frames the story and our opinions. If we were given the school’s explanation or an interview in favor of the policy, it would be much more balanced.

In the article at Eyewitness News, we have a headline, subhead, dateline, a visual, and a link to the video. This already allows the audience to have a sense of setting and pretense before delving into the issue. A few of the same quotes from the video are used in the article and in the video, but a more balanced view is given. In the article, we are told that the district had no comment on the issue and the town’s mayor trusts the school’s principals and superintendent. This explanation of why there is no comment from the school gives us an opinion of how the school is handling the issue by staying quiet. The town’s mayor said he had faith in the school, and thus the policy, so the end of the article is saying something like, “he trusts it, so should you.” Both the CNN video and the article discuss why the policy came about, but the CNN video is almost completely comprised of interviews. I prefer the article over the CNN video because I had a better grasp of the issue and the circumstances.

Framing Across Internet Mediums

The Story:
Bank of America's plans to increase base salaries.

The Mainstream Medium:
The New York Times clearly frames this story in a very objective way. While reading the story it almost feels like the author is trying to give us "insider information". The text is primarily informational and leaves the reader wanting more, almost setting them up to prepare themselves for more related stories.
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/bank-of-america-plans-higher-base-salaries/?scp=1&sq=bank%20of%20america%20to%20raise%20salary&st=cse

The Alternative/Blog Medium:
On UB News, the same story is framed differently. There are more facts, simpler statements and it is far more brief. While reading the story it feels more direct and reader sensitive. The text is primarily factual and leaves the reader satisfied in acquiring whatever information they were seeking.
http://ub-news.com/news/page/2

Conclusions:
Both mediums framed the stories to relate to the taxpayers of America, as well as the specific employees. Neither used sources, however they both felt fair and accurate. The New York Times did however encourage integration with user, by having other links to further pursue the topic and having room for written comment feedback. UB News overall was easier to read and follow. And they were both catorgized in the business section.

A Few Articles of Interest for this Class

The State of the News Media 2009 Report on American Journalism
This report talks a lot about online journalists.

Newspapers Not Harnessing Readers' Social Power
This article talks about how readers can promote the brand of a newspaper.

Bring Back Yellow Journalism
A Slate article.

By the way, I came across these articles on Twitter, following journalists, academics, and social media tweeters. It's actually a great place to get the most current news.

GM Chrysler Bailout

President Obama recently introduced a bailout program for American Auto companies promising to honor warranties even if the company, specifically General Motors and Chrysler, go Bankrupt. Basics of the program were reported upon in both the CNN website and countless blogs throughout the web including conservative blog sight Hot Air, which was a top hit in a google search. Both articles were framed under the assumption that readers are aware of the current economic crisis. 

The CNN piece opened with an optimistic tone in the piece claiming that it comes at a "crucial time." The article goes on to describe the logistics of the program and including quotes from President Obama, GM company representatives and a Kelly Blue Book editor Jack Nerad. By quoting Nerad the article aims the information towards the consumer providing information about current and future implications of the bailout. With a clear focus on the current state, i.e. possible sales increase. 

The Hot Air Piece also provides an overview of the financial plan by including a copy of the press release. The intended audience differed because much like the the name of the blogsite, the writers intentions were simply to voice disapproval (let off steam of hot air). The writer refers to the president as "Uncle Obama" and maintains a sarcastic tone as he calls towards "fans of the DMV" because claims will assumably be filled in at the DMV in the future. The article also focused on more future rather than present implications including the possibility that warranties will become less thorough, providing less retribution to car owners since the bill will be paid primarily by tax dollars. 

The Frame- Senate Bill 170

I have selected two articles- an news story that appeared in the Denver Post and a news that appeared in the Yuma Pioneer. Both discuss the same bill- Senate Bill 170. The bill, which is currently awaiting vote in the Senate Committee on Appropriations, will allow undocumented students to attend publicly funded Colorado universities for in-state tuition costs.

In the Denver Post article, the proposed legislation is framed in a negative light. This begins in the lead in which the article describes the students as "illegal immigrants," an inflammatory term that instatly makes the issue about immigration rather than education. It later uses language that presents the bill as poor and even unsavory. It later describes amendments that will make the bill more "palatable" rather than "bi partisan" or "realistic." Towards the end of the piece the reporter says that groups that support tighter restrictions on immigration oppose the bill, again framing it as an immigration, rather than an education issue.

The second piece, on the other hand, which was taken from a supporter organization's website, presents the bill in a more favorable frame, discussing how it will be beneficial to local students. The reporter uses the term "undocumented workers" rather than "Illegal aliens or immigrants." He says that the bill faces an "uphill battle" almost aligning himself with the bill and its sponsors, and also notes in the first parpagraph that the legislation would be a "big boost" for local students. He enumerates the optimism of supporters and only makes a feeble attempt to present the opposition in the very last paragraph, without quotes or mention of any strong argument against the bill.

Read both the stories

Denver Post (Mainstream)
http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_11829605

Yuma Pioneer (Not Mainstream)
http://www.coloradoimmigrant.org/article.php?id=297

Economics and Culture of News

News in the Marketplace

The ultimate question posed in this chapter - and, more widely, the culture of news as it stands today, with print journalism backing into the corner as new media journalism further develops - is how, how much, and under what conditions do economics influence news judgment?

Perhaps the importance of this question in today's world lies with understanding how news makes a profit and functions as its own professional milieu in order to see how this old system of journalism could subsist or transform in our current world of new media. Once this issue becomes more clear, we are free to look more closely at how we can evolve without leaving the model of the financially supported professional journalist in the dust.

In order to puzzle out the question, Schudson looks at the following:

• How Papers Make Money. Newspapers make income (around 80%) from ads, not readership. Newspapers want a readership with higher income levels in order to attract higher-paying advertisers.
  

• Corporatization of news. Family ownership of news networks has transformed into corporate ownership since the 1970s. Trend toward chain and group ownership. However, journalists' desire to produce news based off newsworthy events and not market trends or advertising will always hamper complete commercial control.


• Profits from Subscribers. Most newspaper readers are subscribers, so most news decisions will not greatly affect profits.


• Commodification of the News Through Commercialization. Commercialization of the news media has commodified the news, in effect encouraging professionalism among journalists. This is something that I think has receded with the growth of Internet journalism and reliable blogs written by citizen journos.

The Denver Post tackled similar themes in an opinion article entitled Journalism's new economics. It, like The Nation article we read on The Death and Life of Great American Newspapers, argues for more governmental financial support of the news industry through public funds.

Questions:

1. Schudson infers that the best way to avoid market-driven censorship is to educate the audience on the importance of access to reliable news. How do you think Schudson expected newspapers to do this? Is there a way new media, particularly blogs, are better or worse than print journalism at educating their audiences on the importance of news?

2. How do the economic theories presented by Schudson seem to shape or frame the news media? How do you think new journalism (blogging, non-profit news sites like the Voice of San Diego) could change or redesign the current for-profit system of print journalism?

News Sources

In chapter 7, Schudson looks at how news sources influence journalism, and, more specifically, how they influence the frames of news media. The main points in the chapter focusing on news sources are below:

• Government Officials and Ease of Contacting a Source. Limited to authorities that are available, knowledgeable, and easy to contact. This often qualifies government officials, the most dominant type of source in today's news. Routine government sources can include press releases, public speeches, press conferences held by government officials. Sources are often constrained to these outlets because of deadlines and budget concerns.


• Sources Looking to Solidify Public Image. News is the currency of community standing; some sources jockey to be in the news (generally surrounding positive events) in order to maintain a favorable public image. Public relations professionals also seek to publish positive news about their clients.
  


• Parajournalists. Sources must work to compile news to present to a reporter, who then edits this material and frames it to create a story. Government sources can also favor certain publications and journalists, controlling the access to news information. These sources can also use the press to their advantage, seeking to undermine government rivals or leaking information.
  


• Ethics in Dealing with Sources. Accept no gifts and recognize the fine line between "high-end schmoozing" that elevates the journalist to a "celebrity level" and a professional journalist-source relationship, that may involve a level of manipulation but does not seduce the journalist.


• Source Control of the News. Schudson encourages journalists to recognize the control and power sources can have over the news, while also thinking about how source control could be downplayed.

The video below is an interesting take on both news coverage focusing on the private behavior of public officials as well as news bias and source control. Although it is an obviously-skewed portrayal of Fox News's depiction of former president Bush's weight gain, the video also shows Fox's lack of sourcing on the story and refusal to re-air John Stewart's harsh criticism.



Questions:

1. How can journalists avoid relying solely on government officials while under tight time and money constraints? How can they avoid buying into or printing spin, and offering only an "elite version" of the news?

2. How would a wider source pool aid print journalists, especially considering that bloggers and other citizen journalists write online using their own sources which are often not government officials?

The Political Culture of News

In chapter 8, Schudson looks at how the news media frame and cover politics and how historical transformation of this process has effected journalism.

• Changes in Government Spark Changes in Political Media Coverage. Changes in government have sparked more media interest and coverage. For instance, during the first century of U.S. history, Supreme Court nominations were closed meetings. When these were opened up, the media converged to cover the breaking story, amplifying the amount of political coverage. In the end, the media have become central to the mass education about our country's political process.
  


• Media's Role in Politics & Context. Role of the media in relation to politics changes based on current political climate and location. Media also allows public opinion of political processes to be voiced, a critical decisive point in many govnermental policy choices.
  


• More Politics to Cover. The U.S.'s decentralized and participatory political structure invites more coverage due to the sheer amount of political information available to be covered.

Questions:

1. How does the U.S. political process (focus on private behavior of public officials, few implications of party strength and emphasis on presidential stature with the public or with Congress) specifically effect the way U.S. journalists frame elections as "political rat races?"

2. How does journalism function as a part or entity of politics? How does news culture hinge on the climate of the day's political climate?

Framing: Obama and the Auto Industry

I chose to look at how Obama is handling the auto crisis with General Motors (GM) and Chrysler. My main stream news source was the Denver Post. The title itself, “Obama puts Chrysler, GM on short leash”, on the Denver Post article tells you exactly how the article is going to go. From the title alone you get the feeling that the author is looking at the situation as having too much government control and throughout the article this really comes across. The opening sentence pretty much says it all, “President Barack Obama asserted unprecedented government control over the auto industry today…”. Later, the author goes on to say that the auto industry is being added to the list of other big corporations that are now under more government control then they have ever been. Overall, I believe the author is putting the administration in a extremely negative light through his criticism of the amount of large corporations that are now, at least partially, run by the government and through the quotes he uses including some by locals in Michigan and the financial secretary for the United Auto Workers. Of course those living in one of the hardest hit areas or those who work in the auto industry would be upset and that’s understandable, however the author doesn’t really show the other side to the story. Even quotes by President Obama himself are quoted in a satirical voice. Being one of the 50 most circulated news papers in the country, the Post should do a better job of showing both sides of the story.


My choice for an alternative media source was Politico online. The Politico article differed substantially from the Denver Post article. They authors were much more objective and talked about all sides of the story including quotes from the President and from those who oppose Obama’s plans. They start off by describing what GM and Chrysler have to do to receive additional bailout money and how long they have to do it. Then they go into what Obama has said about the two companies including that he is optimistic that GM will be able to get out of the hole they are in while he isn’t so sure about Chrysler’s ability to do this. Obama admits that auto industry leadership isn’t the only one to blame in this auto crisis; it is also the fault of those in leadership positions in Washington. They also discuss the fact that Michigan lawmakers don’t feel as though Obama’s plan isn’t enough and how the Governor feels that GM’s CEO was “made into a sacrificial lamb”. Politico also includes a video of Obama talking about the problems in the auto industry which really shows you just how serious this problem is.


While the Denver Post article seems to doubt Obama’s ability to do anything more than control industries that have never been under government control before, Politico online seems to just want to state the facts and be fair to all parties. The articles have many of the same quotes posed in very different ways.

Framing Sarah Palin

The Topic

I chose to do the story on Sarah Palin and her foreign policy experience. For my first source, I used Saturday Night Live's parody of Palin's interview with Katie Couric (view real version here), focusing on the part where she answers the question about her foreign policy experience. The other source is "No Experience Necessary" an article by Michael Kinsley from slate.com.


Comedy as news?

It may seem strange to choose SNL's parody of this interview as opposed to the real thing, but I find that in doing so I kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, as SNL is an interesting media source to compare any other source to and it also has many direct quotes from the actual interview. This allows the viewer to see, very obviously so, SNL's point frame, but also, in a more subtle way, the frame that first occured in the original interview.

SNL, specifically Tina Fey, uses visuals with comedic hand motions and words that are direct quotes from Palin to frame this story. These visuals and words leave no doubt in the mind of the viewer what angle SNL is taking-mockery. SNL is a comedy show which allows the frame to be as twisted as it is. The biggest part of this frame is the fact that the main source is Palin herself and with a few simple elaborations by Tina Fey it becomes a hilarious parody of the already awkward interview. It takes an interview that may be hard for some to see as funny and makes it easy for everyone to think of as funny.


Palin Innocent

In the article at slate.com, the frame is surprisingly different. Though it begins about the same as every other article on the issue of Sarah Palin-which generally means mockery of her supposed experience as opposed to support of- in the end it puts the blame on McCain. It isn't a mockery of the stupidity of the what Palin said, but instead a criticism of McCain's choice. The frame is created, I feel, mostly by focusing the issue on McCain as opposed to Palin. What's not framed is Palin's silly visuals and direct quotes as with the SNL video. Also, I feel as though who the author is contributed to why the frame is what it is. He is, traditionally, a columnist and also the founding editor of slate.com. This may allow him to come to conclusions that other authors wouldn't come to because he is more free to. He is more free to shift the frame without the audience wondering what he is doing.

Huffington Post announces Investigative Fund

This new fund will provide opportunities for editors and investigative journalists. Cool that they have the money to swing this. Check out the entire article at the Huffington Post.

Media Frame: Courtney Love sued for libelous Twitter posts

The story

Musician Courtney Love (right) is being sued for libelous comments she posted on her Twitter account, as well as MySpace and Etsy, an online marketplace site. The allegedly libelous comments were aimed at Love's former fashion designer Dawn Simorangkir.

The mainstream frame

The Washington Post covered the story with hard-news objectivity, if not balance or fairness. The headline is concise and informative -- Designer sues Courtney Love over Web rants -- and gives the first impression that the story, while entertainment-focused, will center on a noteworthy lawsuit based on Love's celebrity status.

The story ultimately frames Love as hypocritical and irresponsible:

"Love approached the designer last year to create clothing and apparel for her, but later refused to pay for the work and unleashed her verbal attacks, Simorangkir's lawsuit states."

Despite the absence of adjectives, the use of words like "unleash" and "attack" do enough of the job: they frame Love as hostile and out of control.

Despite the Post's attempt to contact Love for comment, they were unsuccessful. This skews the story overwhelmingly toward Simorangkir. Although the Post could have conferred with sources close to Love, or find and include direct quotes from the allegedly libelous posts, they did not -- which contributes to the story's frame. Instead, the Post simply notes the type of comments Love made:

"The fashion designer's lawsuit accuses Love, the widow of Nirvana frontman Kurt Cobain, of spreading false statements online that Simorangkir is a drug dealer, a racist, an unfit mother and a homophobe."

A story aiming to remove itself from this frame wouldn't have published without comments from the singer/actress or verifying and reporting on the exact content of Love's online posts.

The alternative/blog frame

Salon.com reported on the story with the bold headline Courtney Love, trailblazer, which obviously communicates the writer's perspective on the celebrity who has sparked the first Twitter-related lawsuit.

This article provides straight quotes from Love's allegedly libelous comments (accusing Simorangkir of being a "nasty, lying, hosebag thief"), which is more explicit and objective than the Post's story, but also includes the blog-staple of personal opinion. This obvious personal perspective slant gives the story its frame.

Writer Rebecca Traister qualifies the story as newsworthy because Love is

"...the first person ever to find herself on the business end of a Twitter-related libel suit. You can't make this stuff up, people."

Furthermore, Traister refers back to the current news landscape -- citing the economic crisis -- in downplaying why Love might have defamed her former fashion designer.

Police: Gunman's estranged wife worked at home

I chose to analyze the story of the gunman, Robert Stewart, in North Carolina who has been accused of killing eight people at a nursing home. I found articles about this story on CNN.com and on the blog website Salon.com. Both sites discuss the idea that the killer chose the nursing home because his estranged wife worked there.

Surprisingly, both websites frame the story similarly. On CNN, the story is framed in a way that supports the idea that the gunman began his rampage because his wife worked there. Early in the report, the city’s police chief is interviewed, claiming that he believes the two were separated at the time of the shooting, potentially causing hard feelings and anger on Stewart’s end. One of the killer’s ex-wives was also interviewed in the story. She expressed that he occasionally had violent outbursts from time to time and that she wasn’t surprised to hear that he was the attacker. Her statement once again supports the idea that the gunman was an angry man and that previous hard feelings towards his estranged wife most likely led him to attack. I found it interesting that the bulleted points at the beginning of the article backed up the fact that the “alleged gunman’s wife worked at the nursing home,” which is the title of the article. However, once I read the entire article, only the first few sentences discuss this point. A majority of the content is about his angry and violent past, and what authorities believe caused him to rebel.

On the blog website Salon.com, the frame is fairly similar. The most noticeable difference is the amount of information that is mentioned about the shooter’s estranged wife and how their rocky relationship could’ve caused him to act out at that specific nursing home. In the article, there is mention of what another outside source had to say about the idea. The News & Observer of Raleigh, NC, reported the name of his wife, the fact that the two still shared a home together, and clarification that she was in fact working at the nursing home at the time of the shooting. Salon.com shares much more information about the wife and the details of their relationship. The included sources better support the title of the article: “Police: Gunman’s estranged wife worked at home.” The article includes sources that had relationships with Stewart, which makes the information about him and his estranged wife more credible. Overall, I think the Salon.com article does a better job of framing the story based on the title of the article. When we read the title, we make assumptions as to what the story is going to be about, and we are provided with important information about the troubled relationship.

Links: http://www.salon.com/wires/ap/us/2009/03/30/D978BKNO0_nursing_home_shooting/
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/30/nursing.home.shooting/index.html

Framing: Fire Crews Leave Coyote in Lake Michigan

On March 3, 2009 a Chicago fire department received a 911 Emergency phone call regarding an animal that was stranded on a piece of broken ice on Lake Michigan. The department scuba team was sent out to rescue the animal, which was originally thought to be a dog. When the team got to the animal, they realized that it was a coyote, not a dog, and chose not to rescue it. Officials say the department divers were unprepared to encounter a wild animal, however animal advocates dispute it. This article created a lot of controversy between people agreeing with the department's choice in abandoning the coyote versus the people who believe that the coyote should have been saved- regardless of its wild stature. 

I found this original story with the Chicago Tribune. The article was short and to the point and did not use any visuals. The article used sources that expressed different sides to the controversial story. The article quoted the men involved with the rescue team who chose not to save the coyote, as well as the bystanders walking along the beach as it happened. The story creates multi-perspectives because of the diversity in the sources questioned. Also, the language used in the article helps to re-create the story and almost compensates for the lack of visuals. For example, words used to describe the lake were "frigid" and "ice covered". Although this particular article linked to no further video footage, photos, or additional websites, photos were taken during the attempted rescue from an overhead helicopter and sent to local news stations. 

I compared the framing of this story with a blogging website called "The Outdoor Pressroom", which was responding to the article found in the Chicago Tribune Forum. The website gives a little bit of foreground to the actual article but is more of a tease for the real story. This seems to be the point of the site, since the article's short description leads straight to a blogging link. The blog has over 100 comments- all different- but it is more bias compared to the Tribune. Most people who blogged backed up the idea that the coyote should have been saved. A post I especially liked from a blogger named, Amy, read: "Why does the animal have to be someone's pet in order to help it? Wild or domestic, if an animal needs our help we should find a way to help it. That's the beauty of being human, we have the resources to help others (even animals)." Again, this blog did not use any visual aids and was more of a connected site for viewers to go after reading the article. The language used within the blog was a large range since many bloggers were upset with the turnout of the attempted rescue. To get their agitated points across, many viewers used all CAPS to write or used multiple exclamation points or question marks at the end of sentences to depict their frustrations and anger. 

Links:

Chicago Tribune- coyote article 

The Outdoor Pressroom- coyote blog

Today's Discussion

After our discussion today, I left questioning whether journalists had an agenda or whether they were only just presenting the information. From this, I considered how citizens today could extinquish this worry and place some faith in our media outlets. There are ways to do this. For example, citizens today have more venues to publicly scrutinize and criticize media coverage, and there these outlets can also explain several scandals of plagerism and fabrication.


Here's an example from CBS called "Public Eye"...http://www.cbs.com/info/user_services/fb_global_form.php

Framing...Gunman Who Killed 8 in Nursing Home

A gunman in North Carolina shot and killed 7 residents and one caretaker at Pinelake Health and Rehab center. The shooting at this nursing home just outside of Raleigh, is featured in both the mainstream media, AP-informed Foxnews.com and on Reuters.com, which is an online multimedia news agency funded by Thomson Reuters whose journalists are subjected to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
The presentation on Foxnews.com, whose information was gathered from the Associated Press, is clearly fact based with over six quoted lines within the article. They presented the information on a first person scale by interviewing the local sheriff, the shooter’s ex-wife and current neighbor. It was cut and dry in not using specific names of the victims or describing their previous situations before the shooting. It seems that Foxnews.com’s main intent is in providing the background information in hopes of finding and placing the blame on why the shooter did what he did as opposed to focusing on the victims left dead. They leave the audience to decide who or what, other than the obvious perpetrator, should be found culpable.
As for the presentation of the information on Reuters.com, this article had a grass roots feel in giving specific ages of the victims and gathering sympathy from their readers in describing them as “elderly patients in wheelchairs.” This presentation also focused on gaining the awareness and stirring protest to the public when they announced that this was “the third major shooting to occur in the southeastern United States in less than a month.” Through using the empathy of Alzheimer’s patients being shot helpless in wheelchairs and publicly announcing the horrendous increase in deadly shootings, this article is focusing on rallying to stop these mindless killers from killing innocent victims.
The most interesting difference between these two articles on the same gunfire incident lies within their overall purpose for distributing the story. One is on the hunt for the motive and the other wants to pity the victims and end the senseless homicides. It was interesting to see the same quotes used but to portray two different intents in the end.

Links:
Foxnews.com http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,511575,00.html
Reuters.com http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52S1V320090330?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

Framing Assignment

Today, March 30, 2009, a 23 year-old man attacked his three sisters with a knife, killing two of them and wounding the third. CNN covered the story in a video, and dailystab.com covered it in a short write up.

Both stories were framed in a similar way and weren’t very objective, most likely because of the shock and tragedy factor in the story. However, the story on dailystab.com definitely showed the opinions of the writer much more. For example, the story starts off with the line “Oh man, this is so sad and very disturbing,” which reveals the opinion of the writer immediately. The rest of the story sticks mostly to the facts, but the two quotations picked by the writer were clearly selected to prove the validity of his opinion because they are both from the police chief who spoke strongly about the atrocity of the event.

On the other hand, although the CNN video doesn’t state the opinions of the journalist outright, the interview clips with the police chief and the images shown were clearly put in to show how atrocious the murderer is and how tragic the incident is. For example, the video shows smiling pictures of two of the sisters involved multiple times to get sympathy from the viewers. The video also talks about seminars that will take place at the surviving sister’s school and interviews one of the teachers about them, and she also gives her opinion about what happened.

Although journalists try to be objective and give both sides of the story, both of these sources take a clear stance on what happened and frame it in a way that makes viewers see the incident as tragic and the killer a monster more than they would have if only the facts were presented.

Links:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2009/03/30/wcvb.brother.kills.sisters.wcvb
http://www.dailystab.com/man-beheads-5-year-old-sister/

Framing

I chose the story on Obama's recent decision involving GM, where he refused another bailout plan and decided that the company could no longer fix itself. The first source that I looked at for this story was with MSNBC. The story starts out with a light intro, "Obama to GM: Move over, I'm driving." It is an obvious play on words, yet it has serious undertones and manages to create a sober mood. It gives the impression that Obama is taking complete control of the situation, which is what the piece is trying to get across. Also, the title of the piece is an immediate clue as to how the author is looking at the events. "The rough road ahead for GM" isn't very promising and a statement from the president saying that "more of them likely would lose jobs and more plants would shut their doors" didn't help lighten the mood. The media outlet used here is a large company and plays a big part in the communities across the country. There is a video accompanied with the story as well, and though it is long in length there are few pictures. I think this adds to the seriousness of the story.

The other source that I looked to for this story was Slate Magazine, an online production. This is a very different look at the situation as it is in blog form and mostly is thought-provoking rather than fact-giving. There are more questions asked rather than answered. There are multiple links throughout the story that lead to other articles on the subject by papers such as the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal that help make what the author is saying clear. It also adds credibility to the piece. The languaged used is more conversational and could reach to more of the public, I think. At one point I can almost hear the inflection in his voice as the author asks, "It will be Obama's failure, not simply GM's failure, no?" Tjis media outlet is more limited, but also a strong web presence. There are no visuals directly associated with the story but the links provide that.

They are two very different looks at the same subject and they take into account different qualities of the news. The Slate blog is definitely opinionated wheras the MSNBC article is balanced and factual.

Framing Assignment: Jay Cutler Saga

The news issue I chose to explore was a sports news issue, involving the trade talks surrounding Denver Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler. The 2 sources I used were FOX Sports on MSN, and the Onion's Sports Website dubbed "OSN" or "Onion Sports Network" The Onion functions in print journalism very much like John Stewart fuctions in broadcast journalism, exploring news issues through comedy and satire. As far as language, the FOX Sports website is written in a traditional journalistic manner, using an inverted pyramid structure, wheras the Onion Articles use a very conversational tone, in one long paragraph, alsmost like a stream of consciousness. The FOX article sites the New York Daily News, and includes links to other commentary by sports analysts, whereas the Onion article is purely commentary. As far as visuals go, the FOX story presents imigaes from press conferences and actual game photos, whereas the Onion Features ridiculously large visuals including an "infograph" like one would find in a children's picture book. The environment of the 2 news outlets(or in the Oion's case "faux news") is very different, while FOX sports is a source for sports info, the Onion Sports Network, although informational is purely geared towards comedy and entertainment of its readers.


Links
FOX Sports:
"Report: Jets interested in trading for QB Cutler"
The Onion:
Jets Attempt To Trade Mannequin Dressed As Favre For Jay Cutler
Jay Cutler Infograph

Framing

I decided to look at Obama's decision to give aid to the two auto companies, GM and Chrysler. In the New York Times there was an article about this that was very politically driven. David Stout from the NYT was the reporter on this story and used Obama, and administration from GM and Crysler as resources. The language that is used in the article has a very intense tone. In the opening paragraph the phrase, "do-or-die ultimatum." The article found on-line also has a video attached to it with Obama making a speech about what his administration has decided to do since the auto industry is in such bad shape. The article was very informative and it seemed to simply be delivering the news and not showing bias and it did not criticize the president in anyway. The administrators of the auto company also had very positive quotes in the story, which goes along with it being a very politically focused article, and seems to put Obama in a good light. The one thing to notice is the last paragraph of the article states that the government has not been this involved in a companies well-being since the Depression, which is not a positive thought.

On the other hand, on Ub News, Guarav Singh wrote an article on Obama's decisions and was not as politically correct. Singh was quick to mention that Obama did not mention Ford, which is also in Detroit's Big Three and does not need help. This article showed opinion by discussing the negative aspects of Obama's team getting into the auto companies mess. Singh uses the word "aggressive" when talking about Obama and his team getting involved. This story was a lot more obvious in terms of opinion and pointed out different faults in Obama's plan, whereas the article in the New York Times did not touch on that at all. It was clear to see the two different frames. One was very political, while the other was more opinon-centered.

History and the Politics of News Response

Anyone who has taken a journalism class can tell you that if someone died, that goes in your lead.  It becomes your heading.  If nine people died, that’s even better.  As cynical as that comes off, it is the truth.  When people see that nine people were killed, they are automatically drawn to the story, it is human compassion that draws them.  The front page of the New York Times today is a testament to the fact that sensationalism sells papers.  Nine die as gunmen storm police school in Pakistan.  In drug war, Mexico fights cartel and itself.  Gunman kills 8 at N. Carolina nursing home.  There are, of course, other stories not about death or war.  Politics, opinions, entertainment and feel-good stories exist too but the front page is dominated by stories that will make people gasp, cry or worry.  Has the shock factor become the essence of news?  Has it always been that way?  Schudson says that newspapers in America started out as publicity for printing companies.  They expanded with ads and small gossip columns.  They took entire pieces from England papers and reprinted them.  At the very beginning, there were no shocking stories; there were political debates and social events.  Sensationalism has been one of the most influential trends in news, I think partially because it also directly correlates to the amount of papers sold. 

Schudson does not think that there is much to the idea that a “thirst for news is fundamental to human nature.”  I have to disagree with him here though, because if it were true that people did not have a desire to know what was happening in the community, city, state and world that they live in, there would be no newspaper industry at all. 

The style of reporting the news also changes what news we receive.  What I mean by this is that the easier it becomes to snap a picture or type a story and email it in a second, the more news we read.  Online newspapers are constantly being updated so that the front page you read at the beginning of the day could be different from what you read at night when you come home.  This is what is shaping the change of the news, though I do not think that at its essence it has really shifted.  The entertainment section seems to have grown the most over the years, also due to the ease with which we can now report.  A poor quality video of Britney Spears after she shaved her head received over 150,000 views.  This also plays into the question Caddie posed about whether or not the press’ watchful eye is a negative quality or not.  I don’t think that it is all negative; in fact I think that it is a part of the job of journalists, to an extent.  Schudson uses the example of Watergate – though it caused distrust of the politicians that the people elected, it was better to know that they were caught.  This is a huge example but this is the kind of journalism that the public expects, that we are here to look out for them.  Lately though, it feels like we are nitpicking and getting on every word they say and thing they do.  Obama’s joke about the Special Olympics was looked down on and widely criticized, but the blockbuster movie The Ringer with Johnny Knoxville about someone pretending to be disabled to fix the Special Olympics was not.  The thing is that once someone takes on a public office like the president, or even a pop star, the criticism comes with the job.  

Questions:

1.  Do people have an innate thirst for the news?  If so, is their taste what determines what news is?

2. Is it really the technology with which we report the news that shapes it or is that simply a contributing factor?

History of and Problems in the News

THEME #1: History of the News

In Ch. 4 Schudson examines the history of the news media as it has developed in the United States and sporadically in Europe. His analysis of the history of American journalism provides a look the coming of age of the American press from the colonial days of modest four page journals published by small time business men mostly for advertising and with very little interest in the news to the growth of ideals of free press, to the take over of politics and partisanship in the news media, to the penny papers and the commercialization of the news, to the rise of yellow journalism and sensationalism, to the glory days of the news in the 1960s when such great feats as the Pentagon papers and Watergate were accomplished. Schudson's analysis delves into the changing and evolving values of the news always with the footnote that where we have been as journalists determines where and who we are. It is interesting to watch the field change and grow into its modern form in just 30 or so pages. The history of journalism written by Schudson, is, however, somewhat lacking. It focuses almost exclusively on American press coverage of politics, though beats of education, crime, international news and others must have had their own coming of age stories that were just as relevant. It also emphasises the big, mainstream eastern publications, almost ignoring those printed by and about minorities and how they developed as well as local and western news sources. Finally, Schudson's analysis of the history of journalism, when it does look beyond the border of the United States fails to examine any other news media outside of the global north, and beyond that particularly confines itself to European coverage as a relief framework for the changes in the American press over time. On the other hand, his look at the history of American journalism does provide a varied look at the ideas, values and cultural changes that impacted and influenced the development of the press. Further, he does provide a good emperical framework for his timeline.

Questions on History

1. What trend or development in American journalism as described by Schudson, has been most influential in shaping the current landscape and norms of the news media? Why?

2. At its very essence, has the news changed in the last three hundred years. Obviously the means mediums and methods have changed, but have the nature or the roll of the news in society changed? Things to consider: capitalism and sensationalism vs. the more recent development of values of nonpartisanship in news writing.

THEME #2: Press vs. Politics
An over arching theme of these two chapters, vaguely hinted at in his analysis of the history of news and addressed with full attention in his discussion of modern problems in the news is the relationship between the press and democratic politics. Schudson describes, though never really takes a stance on, the way journalists treat one of their most important subjects- politics. There are many arguments in modern conversations about journalism and its shortcommings, that reoprters have become increasingly cynical and enterntainment oriented in their coverage of American politics. Among other arguments, Schudson presents scholars who say that journalists treat the American political system as a game- often with two major players (can you guess who they are?) rather than a multifaceted and complicated political system. He references others who criticize journalists for increased negative political coverage of politicians and for playing into sensationalized "scandal-hungary" coverage of the government. All arguments are interesting and it would be my tendency to agree with most of them. The American press does, in my opinion tend to pit itself against the government, constantly questioning every move and motive of elected officials. This attitude of the press becomes even more obvious during election times when tensions are running high and it is both easy and compelling to present the democratic process as a two party race for power. I find myself guilty of this both in the way I watch the coverage of elections, as well as in the way I cover and discuss it myself. But the more interesting question, for which Schudson does not present a simple answer, is is this bad?

Questions:

1. Is it a negative thing for the press to constantly question a freely and democratically elected government? Does this only create cynicism and polerization among the public or does it serve to keep a government that is and should be "of the people, for the people and by the people" on its toes and in line?

2. How did media coverage, including that of comedic news sources like SNL and the Daily Show, of the last election prove or disprove Patterson’s arguments about the news media’s attitude toward politicians in its coverage? Do you find yourselfs, even as a student of journalism guilty of this kind of attitude?

Links:

TIME Magazine covers during the 2008 Campaign
http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20081110,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20081006,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20080811,00.html

Time magazine coverage of the first presidential debate of the 2008 election
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/16/us/politics/16debate.html?_r=1

John Stuart takes on Crossfire during the 2004 presidential election
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFQFB5YpDZE

SNL Tina Fey and Amy Poehler
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mouuayay5oY

Internet Transparency and Political Figures

Thinking more about the question posed by Alexi in class:


"So long as information is publicly available, political actors have to behave as if someone in the public is paying attention.” Do you think this is a true statement regarding political figures and why?

Looking at it from the point of view of politicians having to watch what they say and do; at the Web 2.0 Summit: Web and Politics panel session, Joe Trippi, most noted for being the campaign manager for presidential candidate Howard Dean, talks about how we are in a state of transition. The Internet, in its nature, is forcing everything to become transparent because of the mass quantities of information available and the ease of posting material online. Because we are getting used to this 24/7 access to information and d.i.y. media, of course we are going to be shocked when a political figure says something seemingly crass like Obama's statement at a fundraiser in San Francisco:



or Bill Clinton being caught off-guard by citizen-journalist Mayhill Fowler who blogs for the Huffington Post. Audio and the full article can be found here. However, Trippi believes that after this transition, we will get used to seeing politicians and other important figures as real people. In fact, that was one of the main images Obama portrayed of himself during his campaign and succeeded.

Looking at the question from the point of view of the main stream media not giving air time to candidates such as Ron Paul or Ralph Nader; in the same Web and Politics panel session, Arianna Huffington, co-founder and editor in chief of the Huffington Post, talks about how the Internet won the election for Obama. People are turning to the Internet for information regarding politics, more now than ever before (see the Pew research regarding the 2008 presidential campaign and Internet use). The main stream media is playing a less substantial role in determining who is a viable candidate. In this last campaign, Hillary Clinton was thought to be the shoe-in for the Democrat nominee until the Internet (well, and Oprah) catapulted Obama into the main stream. This means that people can run for public office with less money, less main stream media backing, or even major party backing and still have a chance at winning (examples include Howard Dean's 2004 presidential campaign, Dean's successful run for chairman of the Democratic National Committee in 2005, and Jesse Ventura's success in the Minnesota gubernatorial election of 1998).

Huffington goes on to say that the two party system of Democrat and Republican is breaking down and that we are now able to make more independent decisions. Obama is connected to regular citizens via the Internet in a way in which no President has ever been before. He is able to mobilize people to contact their representatives in order to push his agenda through. People are able to get information from all sides of an issue, and make informed decisions, not based on party lines, but on facts. I think it will be very interesting to see how this idea of transparency plays out throughout Obama's first four years and if the amount of information widely available does begin to break down party lines.

Here's the Web and Politics video, it's about 50 minutes long, but very interesting. It features a panel with Joe Trippi, Arianna Huffington, and Gavin Newsome, the mayor of San Fransisco.

The Fall of One Journalist during Hard Times

This...although disheartening, provides a real life story of the fall of a journalist who still has the passion to write. Thought it was interesting to hear what happened to him and how he is planning on remaining in the cut-throat buisness. Here's the link...http://www.cjr.org/parting_thoughts/parting_thoughts_jim_spencer.php

What is Journalism and Why Does it Matter?

Interesting:
Lincoln Steffens

The whole “crime wave” in this story was false. It wasn’t that more crimes were being committed: it was just that the two reporters (Steffens and Riis) were competing to report crimes before the other. I found this part of the book really interesting because it made me realize that what journalists report really have an impact on what I do. If I hear about a mugging or a rape in a specific area, I will be more careful when I go into that area, if I go into that area at all.

Themes:
What is Journalism?

Journalism produces and distributes information usually on a daily basis about issues or events going on in society that are important or are related to the public’s interest. Basically, the general function of journalism is communication – communication through shared symbols and meanings. According to Alexander, journalism is “information and commentary on contemporary affairs taken to be publicly important.



Does News Matter?
It seems that news does have the power to create the world we live in because members of the media do have the ability to depict the world through their own thoughts. The idea that news has the power to create the world we live in may come from the fact that we are unable to escape media because it comes in so many different forms and is always on, but there are other less noticeable factors that are influential as well. However, proving the media actually does have any influence is extremely hard to prove. This could be due to several factors: we oversimplify how the media affects society; there is also proof that families, schools, etc. also have great influence over society; and news only distributes information, it can’t provide rewards or punishments.


The media helps to equalize the audience because it provides the idea of commonality and it helps to sustain the idea of democracy. The audience is omnipresent, comes from all walks of life, and has the ability to react to news stories either positively or negatively.


Media Bias
In journalism, the idea of bias is “that the reporter, editor, or news institution owner knows what the real event looks like, but will color it to advance a political, economic, or ideological aim.” But this idea of bias has been almost completely replaced by framing. Framing refers to the way stories are selected, what points or ideas in the story are emphasized as important and how the story is presented to show its impact on the world.


A few examples of framing are that many critics say journalists have a very liberal outlook, most journalists believe they are professionals and aren’t partisan and journalists tend to report more on issues that involve those that are most like them. Obviously, framing and bias do exist in journalism. However, we have to remember that news isn’t able to reward or punish, it is only able to relay information.




Questions:

Do you believe the media influences your behavior and shapes your world?



What do you think Obama was trying to achieve by appearing on The Tonight Show rather than CNN or another news program?



In our book, Alexander states that, “So long as information is publicly available, political actors have to behave as if someone in the public is paying attention.” Do you think this is a true statement regarding political figures and why?

leader/response dates

3/25
leader:Alexi
response:Jamie
3/30
leader:Caddie
response:Meagan
4/1
leader:Leslie
response:Caddie
4/6
leader: Sarah Nock
response: Alexi
4/8
leader:Jamie
response:Sarah Nock
4/13
leader:Maddy
response:Nadia
4/15
leader:Nadia
response:Stacey
4/20
leader:Stacey
response:Leslie
4/22
leaders:Eve and Nadia
response:Thu
4/29
leader:Thu
response:Eve and Stephanie
5/4
leader:Meagan and Stephanie
response:Alexis
5/6
leader:Alexis
response: Maddy and Stacey
5/11
leader:Sara Groton and Marco
response: Lindsey
5/13
leader:Linsey
response:Sara Groton

schedule

SCHEDULE
M 3/23 Introduction
*bring a news story to next class meeting

W 3/25 What is Journalism and What Does it Do?
The Death and Life of Great American Newspapers
Schudson 1-63

M 3/30 The Problem of News
Schudson 64-114

W 4/1 Economics and Culture of News
Schudson 117-166

M 4/6 The People Formerly Known as the Audience: Rethinking the Public
Schudson 167-212

W 4/8 The People Formerly Known as the Audience: Rethinking the Public cont.
Jay Rosen’s The People Formerly Known as the Audience, and Audience Atomization Overcome: Why the Internet Weakens the Authority of the Press

M 4/13 Gulf War Coverage: 1991 vs today
Orville Schell’s intro to Michael Massig’s Now They Tell Us

W 4/15 

Guest speaker Jayson Harsin The Rumor Bomb: On Convergence Culture and Politics
Jayson Harsin

M 4/20

Mainstream News Online
Mark Deuze’s Online Journalism
Check out the following sites online: CNN, Al Jazeera, BBC, New York Times, Denver Post
Jay Rosen’s Bloggers vs. Journalists is over

W 4/22 A New Watchdog: Open Source and Participatory Journalism
Project prospectus due. Brief In-class presentations
Amanda Michel's Get Off the Bus

We Media Intro., Forward, and Introduction to Participatory Journalism

Also check out:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/off-the-bus/
http://english.ohmynews.com/
http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml
http://www.associatedcontent.com/
http://digg.com/
http://slashdot.org/


M 4/27 Midterm

W 4/29 The A-list
Clay Shirky's Power Laws and Weblogs

Check out:
http://www.boingboing.net/
http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/
http://www.beppegrillo.it/english.php
http://www.federatedmedia.net/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
http://www.buzzmachine.com/ New New Media Landscape

M 5/4 New New Media landscape
Beckett Intro, Chapter 1, chapter 2
Review of SuperMedia

W 5/6 Networked Journalism and Politics: How Obama Won
Beckett Chapter 3
David Talbot, How Obama Really Did It! (posted to the blog)

M 5/11 Networked Journalism and the Political: The French Riots and Networked Global Media
Beckett Chapter 4

W 5/13 The Future of News
Beckett Chapter 5
New Bust; New Boom

M 5/18 Deproduction

W 5/20 Final presentations

W 5/27 Final presentations

Syllabus

NETWORKED JOURNALISM
DMST 3900
MCOM 3900
Levels: Graduate, Undergraduate
MW 2:00 pm - 3:50 pm
Mass Communications Building 113
Professor Adrienne Russell
adrienne.russell@du.edu
Office hours: Mondays 1:00-2:00 Sturm Hall 216 or by appointment

This course traces the shift that has taken place over the past 15 years from mass-mediated journalism to networked journalism, with emphasis on experiments in citizen and open-source news and the changing relationship between journalists and their publics. Students will critically assess some of the most controversial news coverage of the era—including coverage of the first Gulf War, the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal, the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and recent civil unrest in France—in order to analyze emerging news cultures and practices and their impact on the public and on democracy more generally.

BOOKS
Charlie Beckett, SuperMedia: Saving Journalism So It Can Save the World
Michael Schudson, Sociology Of News

BLOGS TO CHECK OUT
Polis Director’s Blog
Online Journalism Blog
Cybersoc.com
Virtual Economics
SimonWaldman.net
Buzzmachine
Pressthink
SocialMedia
Adrian Holovaty
Teaching online journalism
First Draft
Journerdism
Yelvington.com
OJR
Romenesko
Online News Association

ASSIGNMENTS/EXAM
Discussion Group Leader

Due date varies (but always 24 hours before assigned session).

Each student will serve as discussion leader for part of one class session. As discussion group leader, you will be expected to read ahead, and read thoroughly, for your assigned session. At least 24 hours prior to your assigned class, blog 500-700 word response that identifies overarching themes and questions that we need to be sure to discuss. This can be in the form of a narrative or an outline with a list of thought-provoking questions. Include between one and three links to news stories, blog posts, youtube videos, or other materials that are relevant to and/or expressive of ideas and themes in the readings.

Respondent
Due date varies (but always 6 hours before assigned session).

Each student will serve as respondent for one session. As respondent, you are expected to select one of the readings for the day and to also read the discussion group leader’s blogged responses to the readings. Then, you will write your own one-page (300 word) response/question to the reading(s) and the posted links. Add one of your own links to the blog. The respondent is also responsible, with the leader, for making facilitating the class discussion.

Blog
You will receive an invitation via email to join our blog group. Please follow the directions in the email. At least 2 times over the course of the quarter you should post a paragraph or two and links to something related to networked journalism. Please also use the blog to share research resources with each other.

Midterm
There will be one essay exam. You will be allowed to use any resources you like to inform your work, including classmates, the internet, books, articles, email exchanges with your parents, whatever. You must, however, use your own words to craft the answers to the questions and you must do so in the time allotted for the exam.

Paper Prospectus
The research prospectus should serve as an outline for your research paper. It should be 3-4 double-spaced pages and should include:
1) a clear statement of your research question;
2) a description of specifically what you are going to look at (ie, audiences/users/producers, media content, media institutions);
3) an outline of the theoretical and empirical literature that will inform your work;
4) a preliminary bibliography.

Final Paper
Choose networked journalism product, organization, idea, trend, or treatment of a particular story and evaluate it by comparing it to traditional newsmedia products and norms. Your paper should be between 5-7 double-spaced pages and should use either APA or MLA style of bibliographic reference. All papers must build on literature in the field and include a literature review.