Be Careful What You Say

Creative Commons photo by teamstickergiant

     Journalists must strive to be objective in their reporting and writing, whether it's what they say or write. That's why, for example, reporters must use the words "allegedly" or "alleged" when they are reporting about someone who is suspected of doing something wrong or inappropriate.

     One must be careful with headline writing too. Here is a case study to illustrate the point. Read this article about an ESPN sports editor who was fired for a headline he wrote last year.

    Then read this article that is critical of the editor, despite his apology.

    Finally, listen to this brief podcast to learn how the editor's family helped him cope with the fall-out of his firing.

    What are your thoughts? Did he deserve to be fired? Or are people too sensitive and concerned with "political correctness" today?

A Case Study: Controversial Rolling Stone cover

Fair Use:  AP Photo/Wenner Media

Occasionally on the blog this semester we will consider real life situations that raise interesting questions concerning journalism, the First Amendment, ethics, etc.

This week I would like you to examine the controversy surrounding a recent Rolling Stone magazine cover that some people felt glamorized one of the Boston bombing suspects. (The magazine typically features rock stars or political leaders on its cover.)

Read the entire article and then share any thoughts you might have. What do you think of the Rolling Stone cover?

The First Amendment: A Blessing and a Curse

Creative Commons photo by Denise Krebs

The First Amendment is the foundation of an open society. Two of the five protections guaranteed by the First Amendment -- freedom of speech and freedom of the press -- help ensure that we provide citizens with a "marketplace of ideas" free from censorship. 

Yet the right to free expression often comes into conflict with other rights, especially when it infringes on the safety or morality of others. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre, for example, is not protected by the First Amendment. Neither is child pornography or material that is considered obscene in nature.    

Click here to watch a brief news report about the case I mentioned to you in class. It was, in fact, the Supreme Court, that made this decision in 2011.       

It should be easy to see why the First Amendment is not just a static document that was written by our forefathers over 200 years ago. Because society and technology change and evolve, the First Amendment is continually challenged by cases that need to be interpreted by the courts. 

While the digital revolution has enabled us to have incredible opportunities and resources at our fingertips, it has also spawned problematic trends. How, for example, do we sift through it all? How will people know the difference between legitimate news sources and biased or unsupported propaganda? How will people be able to make informed decisions?

NBC anchorman Brian Williams summed it up well:  "It is now possible--even common--to go about your day in America and consume only what you wish to see and hear. There are television networks that already agree with your views, iPods that play only music you already know you like, Internet programs ready to filter out all but the news you want to hear . . . The whole notion of  'media' is now much more democratic, but what will the effect be on democracy?"

But unlike the U.S., many non-democratic countries in the world are closed societies where the government attempts to control its people by controlling the media. Watch this one-hour documentary entitled For Neda about true events in Iran. Then comment about what stands out to you the most about this closed society. (Warning: Please be advised that the film contains some violent, graphic images.)

Newspapers: Lost and Adrift? Or Changing and Adapting to the Tides of Technological Change?

  Creative Commons photo by Kevin Lim

Welcome to a new school year! And welcome, young journalists, to Waldsmith's Dispatch, our journalism class blog. I'm looking forward to get the blog up and running again because it works as a great tool to accompany and emphasize issues covered in class, as well a place to share your thoughts and comments. Some of the posts will be "greatest hits" of earlier posts I have created in the past, while others will be brand new.

We are beginning the semester by examining what makes news and exploring newspapers and news websites. The principles of what constitutes solid journalism do not change. However, newspapers are struggling and adapting to technological change, while news websites are also striving to find ways to become more profitable.

Consider this quote from Walter Pincus of The Washington Post, which was recently sold to the founder and CEO of Amazon.com:

"Think of a newspaper as a supermarket of material. I work in the meat department (national and foreign news along with sports and crime) as the public is becoming not just more vegetarian (health, science, style and human interest and animal stories) but also more practical (local news, home furnishing, education, entertainment). The Internet has joined radio and television in being first with news, but Web sites and cable are providing more of what I call 'junk food'— news-gossip and opinions rather than facts."

Do you agree? Where and how do you prefer to get your news? Why?

Read the first two pages of this article about the sale of The Washington Post, then read this story about how the Amazon model may be used on the newspaper.

Please share your thoughts -- just a few brief comments -- about anything you'd like to say in response to anything in this blog post or in the articles.

Tabloids, Cell Phones and Privacy

Last year,in a remarkable case stemming from the right to privacy, the British tabloid News of the World actually closed for good after a shocking phone hacking scandal. Click here to learn more about it, and be sure to watch at least the first video, "Scandal shuts down British tabloid". 

  
Then read this column about the difference between tabloid journalism and investigative journalism.

 Finally, just in case you were thinking that you have no worries about privacy, check out this report   about new cell phone spyware that not only tracks your every move but can also be used a means of harassment. Protect your privacy!

Creative Commons photo by Howard Lake

Lessons in the Right to Privacy

As Americans, we enjoy many rights, but the Constitution does not specifically mention a right to privacy. However, Supreme Court decisions over the years have established that the right to privacy is a basic human right, and some amendments in the Bill of Rights protect specific aspects of privacy. The 1st Amendment, for example, protects the privacy of beliefs (freedom of religion).

Defamation law recognizes differences between public and private figures. Unlike most people, who are considered private citizens, a politician or a celebrity is considered a public figure. So if your next-door neighbor is having an affair, publishing a story about it in the local paper would be a clear violation of his privacy. However, when a public figure does the same thing, the press can reasonably assert that such an event is newsworthy. Former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, for example, waged a prolonged legal battle claiming that hundreds of text messages detailing his illicit affair with a co-worker were private. He lost and ended up going to jail for perjury and other charges.

But sometimes a private citizen injects himself or herself on to the public stage, and by doing so, loses the defense of "right to privacy". If that neighbor of yours is having an affair with a 16-year-old, that information is no longer considered private. Thus the law attempts to balance the public's right to know vs. an individual's right to privacy. If the information is "newsworthy" -- that is, if people have a right or a need to know about something, then that will prevail over a person's claim to privacy.

When it comes to proving fault in a libel claim, the law also treats private and public individuals somewhat differently. Both private and public individuals must prove a publication is at fault, but private individuals only need to prove negligence on the part of the reporter/publication, while public figures must prove actual malice.

Here are some recent libel cases involving Elton John, David Beckham, Keira Knightly and Tom Cruise. As you know, defamation involves either slander through the spoken word or libel through the printed word. But what about social media? Is it only professional journalists who have to worry about these things? Read this article to learn more.

Creative Commons photo by Mike Licht

Tips for writing reviews

Think about what you would want to know about in a review. Depending on what you're reviewing, there will be different things, of course. But whether you're reviewing a film or a restaurant, the bottom line is that people want to know if it's worth their money. Or if you're reviewing a TV show or a book, they want to know if it's worth their time. It's your job to not only tell them yes or no, but to prove your point. Don't forget:  your overall opinion of what you are reviewing should be clear almost immediately.

Speaking of your readers, your review should have a specific target audience which actually makes it somewhat easier to write. In other words, are you directing this review to teens? Parents? (Yes I know I'm reading it, but I want to see that you can make some connections and references to a specific audience.)

You also want to inform your readers so they learn something new. And you should inform them in a way that is interesting and entertaining. The keys to doing that are using your own voice (don't write like a robot; write about your experience and your reaction) and paying attention to detail and word choice.

Show, not tell. In other words. Be DESCRIPTIVE, but not super wordy. Don't forget, this is still journalism, after all. Besides, no one wants to read a really long review. This assignment, more than any other, relies on your personal observation skills, so take very good notes so you will have lots to choose from when you describe and analyze different things in your review. In fact, if you're doing a restaurant review, you may want to snap a few photos of your food and the restaurant to help you better  remember and help you with your description.

Click here to read a brief article on film reviewing. Then read this article for more tips on how to write a great review.

Lastly, take a look at this restaurant review by Molly Abraham of The Detroit News. As you read, pay attention to word choice.  For example, look at the second paragraph. She doesn't just say she ate soup but a "deep bowl of fragrant beef broth" with all kinds of mouth-watering ingredients including "a swirl" of pasta that ultimately "transcends" the standard quo beef broth most of us are used to. (I actually got hungry reading this review.)

Avoid obvious words, like "good" or "delicious". You don't have to be a master chef to know what you're tasting. Was it crispy? Was it sweet? Etc.

Happy reviewing!


Creative Commons photo by ThrasherDave