15: Multimedia and Social Role

Several of this week's readings dealt with multimedia storytelling.  Two things struck me about the readings:

1. No mention was made of the purpose behind the multimedia; is multimedia simply a new way of presenting the same information, or is it a new medium that can be utilized for its specific strengths?
2. No good reason was given for how a specific story is selected for multimedia.  Is the idea that any story is better in multimedia format, or can we look for particular types of stories that lend themselves well to this medium?

My first point ties into the fact that different media formats are good for different stories; some are best told through video, others photography, others writing.  I'm not convinced that every story would be better with infographics, video, audio, pictures, and writing all together--sometimes simpler stories are better.  I'd personally prefer to read a 10-sentence brief about some topics than sift through a multimedia cornucopia.  I think the journalists interviewed in these articles would agree with me; this point may have simply been implied.

My second point, however, is something any multimedia journalist should (and probably does) adhere to.  Some conversation needs to take place before a story is taken.  Which medium (or media) will work best for it?  If you're specifically looking for multimedia story ideas, perhaps you should critically think about the types of stories that would best be told through multimedia.

Multimedia has a lot of strengths, but it's not a panacea.  It'd be easy to fall into the trap of thinking every story needs audio and video to make it pop.

14: Using Data

As we read about data misuse in one of this week's readings (Distrust Your Data), I thought about the fact that I often ask my students to collect and use data without enough explanation about how to use it properly.

I do tell the students how to calculate what makes a survey scientific.  We talk about sample size and using a representative sample.  But we don't talk about writing questions for polls/surveys or interpreting the results.

If the students start with a fundamentally flawed question (as some of the referenced pieces in the Distrust Your Data article did), their answers won't tell us anything--they won't be answers at all.

I will be the first to admit that my yearbook's poll/survey questions are rarely probing or in-depth. This is my second year as adviser, and I am trying to establish relationships with my administrators. However, it's still important for students to understand several things:

• How data can be used to draw attention to trends and issues
• How to ask the right questions
• How to get the right answers
• How to present the answers in a way that makes sense

I think the article we read was entertaining as well as informative.  I could easily use it in the classroom to teach kids how to avoid some of the common pitfalls of using data.

13: Working Undercover

The Ends vs. Means article from this week stuck out to me for a number of reasons.

Smith started the article by giving examples of various journalists and other writers who have obtained hot stories through undercover work.  She then moved into a discussion of the ethics involved.  Her first example pointed immediately to the ends vs. means tactics of the Nazi Germans during WWII.

I call foul.

Seldom can you start a fair ethical argument with a comparison to Nazi Germany.  I do see her comparison, but boy is it extreme.

I had a few other issues with the story.  Much like when a journalist uses anonymous sources, undercover journalists should consider if there is any possible way to uncover the same information without deception.  Maybe it won't be as flashy or good for the journalist's career, but it's necessary to consider.  Smith does briefly mention using other tactics to obtain the information, but I didn't feel that enough attention was given to forthright methods of obtaining the same information.

Another issue stemmed from the language Smith used when discussing how undercover methods apply to regular citizens.  She used a source who stated, "It’s dishonest for anyone in journalism to pretend to be someone they’re not. This rule doesn’t apply to folks outside the profession."  This is her only comment on undercover tactics as they apply to non-journalists, and it is a strange quote to leaving hanging in the open air.



On a side note, I once visited Jerry Falwell's Thomas Road Baptist Church, the subject of an undercover book by Gina Welch referenced in the article.  I did some research, and the author came to similar conclusions as me.  While I do not identify as an Evangelical, I am a Christian (the author was a non-believer).  She attended this church for two years and developed deep affection for the members.  She also found that they helped her answer some profound questions in her life.  I attended the nearby Liberty University (also founded by Falwell, though it is nowhere as extreme as people would tend to believe) for one year and genuinely liked many Evangelicals I came into contact with. I think most stigmas and stereotypes are easily broken, and Welch wouldn't have had to go under cover to experience what I experienced.

12: Journalistic Skills

Sadly, I won't be teaching journalism or advising a publication next year.  I've accepted a position in a specialized program for students who are interested in legal/political careers.

When I mentioned this opportunity to John last month, he pointed out that the skills we teach in journalism are just as applicable in other areas.  News literacy, editing, critical thinking, decision making, analysis--these are all skills that prospective lawyers, police officers, and politicians need.

As we discuss citizen journalists, I can't help but see the need for these skills in regular citizens as well as in potential citizen journalists.  Few of our students will go on to be professional journalists, but all will need to communicate effectively.  I think we're offering a service that extends well beyond one career field.

11: Fact-checking Organizations

As I read the article about Josh Mandel and Politifact, I found myself believing Politifact's assessments without a second thought.

Near the end of the article, I started to realize that I was personally guilty of what the article discusses: believing something without bothering to check into it.

Much like the pharmaceutical industry finances drug trials and studies, politicians would have a huge incentive to fund or influence political fact-checking services.

I have heard of Politifact before.  And the fact that an online newspaper uses their statements in print should be enough to convince me.  But shouldn't I look at this site for myself?  I thought I had learned to be skeptical of information and sources.

I want to end with a wish.  I wish there were organizations out there that everyone could get behind--omsbudsmen universally respected for their ability to separate fact from fiction.  These people used to be called journalists!

10: Code of Ethics for Bloggers

Citizen journalists: a title that has inspired much debate in our class so far this semester.  Many of these citizen journalists use blogging as their main platform.  I've always considered it a problem that citizen journalists did not operate under ethical codes like they would if they worked for NYT, WSJ, or any other media outlet.  How, other than the fruits of their labor, can we determine whether or not a blogger is ethical?

To some extent, material published on traditional media outlets' sites can be believed, though obviously this isn't always the case, and a skeptical eye is always a good idea.  Material published on a blog doesn't hold the same amount of inherent value because your average blog does not have the backing of an editing staff or the tradition of excellence enjoyed by mainstream sites.

I was a bit shocked to read Cyberjournalist.net's code of ethics for bloggers.  Admittedly, I probably would have known that this existed if I had done any digging on the subject.  But it's not a topic that I come into close contact with on a regular basis.

It's a great idea to try to unite bloggers to establish professional guidelines.  However, I do have a few reservations.

I wonder how far-reaching this code is.  Is this something that has gained a foothold in the blogging world, or is it an anomaly?  I would also like to know what percentage of bloggers try to use the code or others like it.

Even though the average blogger may not adhere to specific professional and ethical guidelines, creating a code is a good start toward establishing blogging as a credible platform.

9: Easy to Fool the Media

One of our readings for this week was about Jimmy Kimmel's famous hoax videos (Poynter Article).

I found this article interesting for several reasons.  Of course, it's hilarious.  It's also amusing that media outlets might think the videos are real.

Chapter 6 in Elements tells us that journalists are supposed to be independent monitors of power. But who monitors journalists?  Obviously, Jimmy's videos are not created with the sole purpose of poking holes in what's supposed to be a discipline of verification, but it's a nice side effect.

I almost wish more people would attempt to fool the media so journalists had experience having to verify information rather than blindly retweeting it.

Hoaxes like this would be an excellent verification activity for schools of journalism.  When we're getting ready to write research papers in my English classes, I prime the students with a set of bellringers that contains real websites and hoax websites.  Activities like this in journalism schools might provide student journalists the healthy skepticism they're supposed to maintain.  By the time they become professional journalists, they'll know to question anything they see, hear, or read.

8: Lying to Journalists

One of this week's readings stuck out to me: Lying to Reporters  Especially in the wake of Brian Williams' exaggerated stories, we often think about journalists who lie.  Rarely do we (or at least I) consider the possibility that sources will lie.  OK, obviously we check a source's story and make sure it's true, confirm it with others, etc.  But what about little white lies?  Sources, like any other human being, can succumb to the temptation of exaggerating or making themselves seem better than they are.

How do journalists cut through the spin and the exaggeration?

I think there are a few ways.

1) Get more sources to triangulate.
2) Ask pressing questions to test parts of the story that seem weak.
3) Go into the interview with healthy skepticism.

I'm sure there are more ways, but these would be a start.  From big lies to little white ones, our stories are only as strong as our sources.

7: Filter Bubbles

The TED Talk we watched for week 7 sunk in with me.  In the past, I had been guilty of allowing myself to be walled in by only the news that I wanted to see.

I only bookmarked sites that would provide news about the topics I cared about.  I only clicked on Facebook links for articles I thought I would agree with.  I ignored local news completely.

Since companies like Google and Facebook are now deciding what news will trickle into our feeds, we have to be conscious of the need for dissenting opinions, contrary evidence, and news that doesn't directly affect us.  We have to read every article and watch every video with an open mind and a skeptical eye.

One of the best ways to do this is to take from a variety of sources.  I now have a digital subscription to the local paper, and I at least read the title and blurb for every major article.  I also read USA Today online daily.  On my phone, I get breaking news updates (international and domestic) from BBC.

Maybe enough pressure will be placed on Facebook and Google to take up the mantle of civic and social responsibility.  Maybe they will stop causing users to exist within a bubble of affirmation journalism.  Unfortunately, your average citizen probably has no idea it's happening, and no understanding of the importance of seeking out other sources and opinions.

6: Sources

After this week's readings about sources, I found myself growing skeptical of every report I heard.

This morning on NPR, Dave Mattingly reported that Russia is preparing to open two fronts of fighting in the Ukraine.  However, he simply cited "multiple reports."  With that one statement, Mr. Mattingly has stripped our ability to be informed listeners--critical thinkers who digest information slowly and consider potential motives for misinformation, among other things.

Where did these reports come from?  Why should we believe them?

Anyone who follows world news is aware that Putin's motives, potential moves, and past actions are highly speculated about, but rarely actually known.

Even ESPN does a more solid job with sources (not saying NPR normally doesn't do a good job).  They often cite "team executives" or "team members" as sources.  Sometimes they also cite these mysterious "multiple reports," but more often the source is listed, even if not by name.

We should look to organizations that make a habit out of giving us reason to believe sources.  More transparency!

5: Sports Journalism

I'm an avid sports fan.  This week's article about the two types of sports journalism (There Are Two Kinds Of "Sports Journalism." Only One Of Them Is Really Journalism.) struck a chord with me.  I think there is vast potential in sports for "good" journalism.  Here are a few examples that I've wondered about over the years:

• The Seattle Seahawks have had 7 PED suspensions since Pete Carroll took over as coach.  Is he to blame, or are there other factors?
• What in the NFL's culture might be contributing to the issues with domestic abuse?
• Why do so many athletes go broke after they retire?  What should professional sports organizations be doing to keep this from happening?  Are any measures currently being taken?
• A lot of animosity exists between the NFL and the NFL Players' Association.  Issues like the NFL's media policy, changing rules/penalties, and CTE/concussion problems should all be looked into.
• The Patriots have a history of cheating.  What other allegations have come out in recent years, and might they now be substantiated?
• There is a major issue with racism in European soccer.  One player even had a banana thrown at him during a game.  Could those issues be explored?

The potential here is limitless.  Fans love to hear the latest trade rumors and free agent gossip, but sports could benefit from true journalism.  Sports fans everywhere would read these in-depth reports, just like anyone would read the stadium food safety story on ESPN that we read.  

4: Plagiarism

This week's article from Poynter about plagiarism and attribution (http://www.poynter.org/news/mediawire/20374/great-journalists-credit-others/) didn't resonate with me until I read this article a few hours later: http://consequenceofsound.net/2015/01/tom-petty-awarded-songwriting-royalties-for-sam-smiths-stay-with-me/

Essentially, Sam Smith is going to pay 12.5% royalties and provide songwriter credit to Tom Petty because the chorus in Smith's "Stay With Me" is almost identical to "I Won't Back Down" by Petty.

On a side note, my good friend Ben wrote a song called "Folk Singer" that we have recorded and played a number of times.  After a year or so, Ben realized that he had unintentionally lifted a portion of the melody from an indie song he'd heard before.  He called me after hearing that song again, and said that we couldn't play the song again until he fixed the melody.  It was an unconscious mistake, and he refused to even practice the song until he came up with a solution.

Obviously, intentional plagiarism is a different matter.  Another article we read discussed how several companies wrongfully tweeted about Joe Paterno's death before he actually died.  One of the major companies tweeted the news without verifying it or providing attribution to the organization that broke the story.

Does journalism fall into the same category as music?  Does unintentional/unconscious copying occur, and how do we fix it?  Does it matter that people will not notice these similarities on most occasions?

3: Inspiring Copycat Murders

Even before I began teaching journalism, I wondered why the media creates a feeding frenzy each time a mass murder takes place.  The answer is obvious: it's highly newsworthy.  Can we blame news outlets for heavily covering a subject that deserves coverage?  A subject that everyone needs to know about?

News media should recognize their social responsibility to help prevent future mass murders.  In 2015, it's guaranteed that mass murderers' face and name will be splashed all over every news site, blog, paper, and magazine for at least a week.  I'm not suggesting that we refrain from covering these shootings, but I am suggesting that we refrain from glorifying the shooters by burning their pictures and faces into audiences' brains.  Perhaps we also should also use these tragedies to expose weaknesses in schools' security systems and draw attention to mental health and gun safety.

Tufecki's article in The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/12/the-media-needs-to-stop-inspiring-copycat-murders-heres-how/266439/) offered four potential solutions to this issue.  His suggestions would be a good start, but how can we get every news agency and news source to agree to these guidelines?  If one respected news outlet were to make a stand, perhaps others would follow suit. Lessening the celebrity of mass murderers might help stop future tragedies.

2: Objectivity in the Media

When I took over my school's journalism program two years ago, I had no training and no experience. My guiding light was an outdated textbook in which "technology" was the final chapter. It included a short section about DSLR cameras and mention of computer-assisted reporting.  The authors spoke of the Internet with reverence and awe.  Most startlingly, the book was actually published around 2005.

In this book, objectivity was referred to as being free from bias or partiality.  Even without experience, I wondered how that could be possible in scholastic media.  How can a student at my high school free him/herself from the attachment high school students nearly always have to their school?

In Ethics class last semester, I first encountered the notion of objectivity of process, rather than objectivity of product.  We re-encountered this notion in our readings this week, and it caused me to consider that some of the issues we're experiencing in the professional sphere are probably related to deficiencies like the ones in this book.

There are two problems, though.  Not all journalists further their education after graduating from college.  And these days, most citizen journalists have no formal training whatsoever.  How can we make paradigm shifts (like that of objectivity as a process) within the field now?  Better educational materials and better-informed advisers will certainly help develop professional journalists.  I think organizations like the SPJ can drive change among current journalists--and maybe include the increasing ranks of citizen journalists in the process.

1: News Literacy

Much of our conversation last night either directly or indirectly related to news literacy. The problem is, there's a paradox inherent in news literacy: most people who would benefit from becoming news literate are unaware of news literacy, and also unaware that they're in need of it.

I know a guy; let's call him Conspiracy Theorist for the purposes of this public blog. Among many other wacky encounters, I recently sat through a ten-minute lecture from him about how ebola had become airborne. He was absolutely convinced that this disease would be the end of society as we know it--80-90% of the United States would perish, and the military would take over. A friend and I patiently tried to explain to him that ebola is not an airborne virus. I even showed him an article from a prominent microbiologist explaining that ebola has a very small chance of ever becoming airborne. He replied with an article from some crazy alternative news source, the main page of which contained articles about UFOs and other phenomena.

Conspiracy Theorist seems like a normal guy when you first meet him. But he's in dire need of news literacy. The problem is, he doesn't know that he needs it. Further, you could never convince him of this because he constantly references articles and information from these same news sources to prove his points. It's circular reasoning at its very finest.

What solutions are there to these issues? What if news literacy were embedded in college (or even high school) general education curricula? What if news sources took it upon themselves to encourage audiences to verify information and search out bias? Both of these solutions seem unlikely to happen. Even if we pursued these solutions, it's difficult to teach people about something they don't think they need. For now, I'll do my part by being news literate and teaching news literacy to my students.