He Said, She Said

The media loves gossip. Especially when it comes to the 2008 presidential campaign. Well, it may not be the media that loves gossip, more like the readers and viewers who love hearing the candidates battle it out. Either way, the coverage of the 2008 campaign has been a muddy fight.

All I had to do was type in “Obama said Clinton” into Google news and hundreds of links to stories reporting what the two said to each other pops up. Recently Clinton’s aide, Billy Shaheen, said something about Obama’s drug use in his younger days. This dirty little secret was splattered all over the news. I guess Clinton realized that this tactic was not very appealing to potential voters so she formally apologized. It wasn’t until December 15th that Obama talked to the press about the whole incident. What’s the deal with all of this bashing? Well, when the going gets tough then the tough gets going.

Abc new’s political blog had this comment of Obama’s about the issue: “On the Clintons' tactics: More broadly Obama was asked if Bill, Hillary and Shaheen’s comments were intended to make him angry or feel demeaned. Obama said, “When I was 20 points down, they all thought I was a wonderful guy. Obviously, things have changed here in Iowa and the rest of the country, and that's the kind of politics we've become accustomed to.”

If your leading the race, and we all know that the media has been treating the 2008 campaign as a horse race, then there is going to be much more attention on you. The New York Times online has a nice interactive chart that shows all of the candidates and who has talked about them. Interesting, but does the public really need to analyze the mudslinging of the candidates? What about the issues? As a potential voter I really could care less about what each of the candidates are saying about each other. I want to know what the candidates are saying about the issues. The future president should not be voted for because they know how to throw it down like a middle school recess fight.

The Dirty P Word and How to Stalk a Political Candidate

Oh that P word. I think it was back in 9th grade, when you first start to write research papers, that I first heard the word plagiarism. There was a whole class period devoted to what plagiarism. But then when I got to college I was surprised that my journalism professor had to discuss plagiarism. I just assumed that if you were going to be a good credible journalist you would not steal other people's work. I guess I was naive. This week's reading discusses whether taking quotes from other articles without citing the source is really plagiarism. In my mind it is. If you did not get the quote yourself then you should cite the source. However, I believe that if you didn't not get the quote yourself then you really shouldn't put it in your article because it was already printed. I know that sometimes it is hard to come up with quotes and live up to the expectations of your editor but there is a real danger with using already printed quotes.
First of all, what if that quote is not true. Sure you are citing the newspaper that originally printed the quote but you are also reprinting it, reaffirming the quote's truth. Requoting can spread lies very quickly.
Secondly, it can really ruin your credibility as a journalist, and the credibility of the paper you are writing for. Readers what the facts and honest work.
The issue with John Merrill and the cancellation of his column is a debatable issue. He did plagiarize but was it necessary to pretty much ruin his career by canceling his column and tainting his name forever? I think that the editor of the Missourian should have made Merrill apologize for not citing the author of the quotes but not cancelled his column. However, I do understand that the editor probably felt that it was his obligation to set standards for the school and allowing the column to still be print would have gone against those standards. I think the moral of the p word story is to not plagiarize because that p word just brings trouble where ever it goes.

The other reading dealt with tips for journalists who are writing about politics. Now, my friends are always very surprised with my ability to find people and information about people. I just tell them I learned it in journalism class. Journalists have stalker-like techniques and that what makes them so crafty. Basically the other reading was an article with hundreds of links to find dirt on political candidates. When I was looking at all the different types of information you can find on a candidate, remind you they are human beings, I started to feel a bit weary of whether it was "politically" correct to print. But then again, political candidates are people that may be in charge of a country some day, and in that case the public should know everything about them and their intentions. The public just has the right to know. So then, I bookmarked the article.

New Age Journalism

This week's reading was an article on soundslides and an interview with it's creator, Joe Weiss
The first thing that Weiss said was that he feels that 10 slides with audio makes much more of an impact that a minute of video. I think the same thing. I feel like people are used to seeing video, and it just like viewing something right in front of you. A photo selects a certain moment in time that you would not usually notice in real life. Examining a photo for a couple of seconds really lets you look into the moment, the background, what is in focus and subtle postioning and expressions. It is a much more profound process then watching video footage.
Another thing that caught my eye was that audio slide shows has not been used to report hard news. I think that this is because the best slide shows use very good photos, not just ALL the photos taken at, say, one press conference. That would be boring. I think that audio slideshows work very well when it is a feature type of article, something that is more long term than an imediate news story.
The article was very helpful for someone who is going to be using soundslides soon....like me. Personally, I think that multimedia journalism is something I am very interested in. I like the idea of exploring all different types of journalism and combining them. I like to think that I am a creative person and multimedia journalism really lets you be creative and experimental.

Whats God Got to Do With It?

Mitt Romney is trying to play the faith card in his next speech entitled, "Faith in America." He is going to address his Mormonism in a speech at State College, Texas.
In the article in the New York Times it stated that according to a recent poll not many Americans would vote for a Mormon. Hmm.. I wonder if the popular HBO tv show Big Love has anything to do with that reasoning. In any case, Rommney is trying to play up his faith (brings me back Bush's campagin). What I find strange is that faith even comes into play at all during presidential elections. America is the land of freedom of religion. Not everyone in America is Christian....okay well the majority of Americans are Christians. That's exactly my point, the majority of Americans are Christians, but that means not EVERYONE.
I just think that faith should stay out of the government. Leading a country based on certain religious values is not going to serve everyone, and will especially not help relations with other non-Chrisitian countries (ahem....the Middle East).
I pulled this quote because it kind of made me laugh, "share his views on religious liberty, the grand tradition religious tolerance has played in the progress of our nation and how the governor’s own faith would inform his presidency if he were elected.” Inform his presidency? So God is going to tell him how to run the United States? I guess Rommney is trying to bring back "In God We Trust."

I just read on CNN.com that YouTube is playing a role in the white house campaign. At first the website was just resurfacing old video clips of debates in which the canidates said some ridculous things. Like, Jon McCain saying "remember that old Beach Boys song, bomb Iran. Bomb, bomb, bomb." and would be presidental canidate, Sen. George Allen saying "Let's give a welcome to Macaca, here. Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia." Pretty much quotes coming back to haunt them years later.
But now it has envolved into the average-joe-smoe interacting with the canidates. There was even a debate held in Charleston, South Carolina last July where the canidates answered questions that average americans presented on YouTube. Some were light, but others were pretty loaded questions. Such as the one that addressed whether the candiates would meet with unfriendly dictators during their first year of presidency. Questions like that made the canidates realize how serious the people of America are in selecting their new president. The interaction between the candiates and the american citizens is closer with the help of YouTube.
I think that this interaction is GREAT. The president of the US should represent their people, and the only way to do that is to actually respond to them.

Journalism Revolution

This weeks readings were on the revolutionary changes in the field of journalism. I found all of the readings very interesting. Whenever I tell someone I am studying journalism they always seem to ask me which direction I am going to go with it, print or broadcast. That question has become outdated since online journalism became popular. I am never sure how to answer them because I am interested in both, can't journalists be both? With online journalism it is possible to do both. It is possible to tell a story with visuals, audio, and print.
The one reading talked about how some people just watch tv or read the news, but they are only getting either/or when doing so. People who REALLY want to be informed have been using the web for their news because it is more detailed. Instead of getting just the print version or just the broadcast version, they get both.
Another aspect of online journalism that is interesting is how the videos found on news websites are just similar to a short documentary.Many people do no watch documentaries, unless it is something big like the Micheal Moore ones. However, they are really informing, yet at the same time entertaining. Creating a video package for an online news source is similar to a documentary because it also has to be entertaining, or have some type of engaging aspect to it. It also does not have the time contraints of videos for tv. Thus, you are able to be a bit more experimental with it. Focus on a story of one person and then bring it out into a bigger picture, or infuse some slides or pictures, instead of just footage.
On that point, I liked the one reading about how people are becoming numb to mass destruction or mass suffering. It order to really engage a viewer into a video or picture you have to single out that one suffering person. The impact of one person's story is so much greater than that of an almost generic-like story of some type of destruction. The world has become numb to bad news, but hopefully they have not become so numb that they no longer feel compassion for a single human being.

Republicans Clinging On

Its becoming more and more evident that Republicans are getting a little scared. With the congress now swung to the left side, they are making every last effort to ensure that the presidency stays republican next November.
Since Giuliani is currently the forerunner for the right sided party he has been gathering support from many important conservatives, including Reverend Pat Robertson, a prominent Christian leader and social conservative activist. Robertson was once quoted saying- "Americans had left themselves vulnerable because they had insulted God by allowing abortion and pornography," when discussing the attacks on America in 2001. Now why would Robertson want a pro-choicer like Giuliani running the country? Well, right now its looking like it will be either Clinton or Giuliani....and God forbid, America gets out from the restraints of the Republican party.

Mayday Mayday

The online readings for this week kind of surprised me. The topic for this week is investigation, so the websites that I looked over were the Investigative Reporters and Editors online resources. The one site, In the News Archive, was the ultimate reporter's access to everything, sudden disaters (natural and man-made) to bombings in foriegn countries. I was amazed to see that all this information was gathered into one little link. I mean there was even a link for ferry accidents. It just goes to show that if you are going to be doing some investigativve reporting there truely are lots of resources to reasearch your topic of investigation. I wonder if the reporters for 60 minutes refers to IRE?

Civics

Chapter 8- Covering Criminal Courts
This chapter focused on criminal court cases.
I found this interesting: in law the correct terms are guilty or not guilty and never "proven innocent" but in reporting the proper term is "not guilty" because in case the "not" is somehow dropped the message does not change. I never thought about that before but it definitely makes sense.
Then there was the information on the term "Gag Order" which is when the media's access to a trial is limited due to the lawyers "trying their case in media more than the courtroom." I think that the media SHOULD be allowed in the courtroom. It is a public place and it is a right that we have in America to have access to court. HOWEVER, it is very important that the media does not sensationalize a trial, it important to stick to the facts and not create more conflict and tension that may not exist.
Finally a good tip was to pay attention during jury selection because it says alot about the trial. Sometimes jury selection is held in jury chambers but reporters are STILL allowed access except in unusual cases.

Chapter 9- Covering Civil Court Cases
In my Iroquois and Their Neighbors class we are studying the court cases of the Cayuga and Oneida so all this extra information on civil cases is really helpful. Basically civil cases take a long time to go to court and are not usually followed as closely as criminal cases because "pre-trial" is so lengthy. It was interesting to see how media plays a part before a case. Something news worthy may have sparked a civil case OR be used in a case.

After reading these court articles I realized I am much more interested in the workings court than I thought I was, I guess this is good because I may be reporting on it one day.

Hola America!

A recent article in the NY Times talked about the rise of awareness of the emerging Latino citizens in Iowa. I think it is a demographic that many candidates, sadly forget about. I have noticed many more Hispanics moving into my neighborhood and city in New Jersey, now I am not sure how many of them actually citizens of the United States or how many of them will vote but I think that Latinos will start to become more involved in the country. Having the ability to vote for who they want to represent them is a chance that they may have not had in the past.
One point was made by Alex Orozco, an organizer with United for the Dignity and Safety of Immigrants that I think is really interesting:
“But they are not. I don’t sense that the Democrats think immigration is a priority for them, not even close. When they do talk, they are often very good at talking more about enforcement because if they talk positively, they open themselves up to attack. The Republicans care more about this issue — but in a negative way.”
Of course Latinos are not going to vote republican but then again there really isn't a trust in Democrats either. I know that Obama has been heavily campaigning in Hispanic communities but I think it will take longer than this upcoming election to establish trust with Latinos voters. It is a very touchy issue right now and I don't think many of the candidates know how to handle it.

Reporting on Court Causes and Crime for Dummies

Whew! Finally done with the reading for this week.
The readings on court and crime cases were very interesting, mostly because it was very informational. I really was not educated in either subject to everything I read was relatively new to me. So here is my break down on the reading, chapter by chapter:

Chapter 1.
This chapter dealt with getting into the crime reporting field and offered lots of good tips. First off, it said that most crime reporters do not get any training when they start the job so they either need to know about crime before hand or be a quick learner. OR they could read this chapter.

This chapter also, distinguished the differences between theft, burglary, robbery and all those other fun terms. This helped me because I didn't realize that there was such a difference between all of them. Now, I can be accurate. The author also suggested that in order to report about cops and crime, act like you are going to become a cop. Get into the element.

The author also urged to "tread lightly" because the crime happened to real people. Which I can see getting so wrapped up in the story that it could be easy to forget about that. He also mentioned the stress and danger of the field of crime reporting. I guess I won't really know until I try it but I don't think that crime reporting would be the right news reporting for me. It is a very stressful job, not that other reporting isn't but its stressful in a different way because you are dealing with people dying or who died, and other serious events. It would be hard to move from one depressing story to another and not have it affect me.

I liked the question that was asked at the end of the chapter: Do we give readers and viewers what they demand, or do they merely eat what we feed them? I think that this is a BIG question in the media right now. If you look at the headlines of the day you start to wonder. I think that some news outlets know what sells, and only reports about those topics, which is not what journalism is supposed to be about.

Finally this chapter emphasized standard reporting tactics such as to stalk sources, but make sure not to harass them and to be weary of everyone, always suspect.

Chapter 5
Chapter five was about dealing with victims. When you first meet a victim be careful and sincere. A good tip I got out of this chapter was that in order to stand out in an event where there are many reporters, be the one to just give a card with a note. This is because the best stories may come up after a while and/or the victim may remember you more than all the other journalists badgering them with questions. This chapter also said to use judgement with graphic details, not everything is fit to print.

Chapter 7
Chapter 7 is basically a crash course in the U.S. court systems and how a journalist should handle stories about court cases. It is hard to grasp all of the information so quickly, so this chapter would be a great reference if I needed to look something up really quick. While I was reading it though I wished that I had paid more attention to my civics class back in middle school.
I liked how the author related covering a court case like a sporting event. There is a winner and loser. So true.

Another good tip to remember was that it's about more than words. Watch how everyone in the court room acts, the jury sees this and the public should be able to also. Adding details about facial expressions and such would also be great elements to storytelling.
I liked that this chapter reminded that it is important to be respectful to everyone. Everyone and anyone could be helpful and no one wants to help you if you rude.

Chapter 7 also emphasized to make use of legal documents because a document can't turn on you. Then it also went on to explain the different sources that would be helpful to a reporter on a court case including; docker clerks, court clerks, law clerks, etc.

Of course, lawyers are excellent sources, although the chapter reminded me that a reporter must remember to keep objectivity when writing. Lawyers are representing their client and thus, may say things to only help their client. But they may also know when anything big in the case is going to happen, so they would be a good one to get a heads up from.

Finally, when reporting on court cases be prepared to stand up for what you wrote. And, this why having a documents as sources is important too.

Blogs

Jen Giuliani: “um…9/11”
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1432332054926314857&postID=3602196364363561284

Angela Three Mile Island and Orwell
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=42257117073682694&postID=8521362734687163673


Moria I feel like I've been reading about crime for 827382 days...
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7382047850767314362&postID=853000419101295301

Brianna Really…what the fuck
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8919329766601485080&postID=301656211991392007

LuAnn More than words
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1074779367077476366&postID=8022255638331648111

Laura Hillary Clinton, no joke.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2995385118409212375&postID=5799656686020647222

Marcus News Reporting and Writing
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6931476094949381542&postID=4038962242675357408

Kayla $5000 per baby? I wonder how much for twins…
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3914167033385081404&postID=6000932847964547380

Obama

I just read an article in the Baltimore Sun that reported on an interview on NPR with Barack Obama. It mainly talked about Obama's opinion on the war with Iraq and how it differs from Clinton's. I have been reading the news about the 2008 Election candidates but I hadn't really heard any interviews or speeches by Obama before. I only knew his views from how the media portrayed them, I hadn't yet heard them come directly from him. So this interview was really interesting. There is a difference between knowing about someone and then actually hearing how they speak, and how they process information and how they express themselves. I first started reading the article thinking I would blog about something to do with Obama vs. Clinton but then I was really intrigued by the responses that Obama was giving. He gave me this impression of a very calm and rational persona. I also saw him as not trusting everything congress and the Bush-Cheney team tries to get voted for and that is REALLY important because by now I think its been pretty clear that they are not to be trusted.
I know that many people do not think that Obama has a chance against Clinton because he is so young and not as experienced, but I think that it is time for a change. Not just a small change but a HUGE change. America needs a young, spirited and rational person to change things for the better.

Giuliani, a Democrat?

I am not really a fan of Giuliani, but it was hard to pass up blogging about him this week because he just campaigned in my hometown, Cape May, NJ. Staying true to my roots I will use my local paper as a reference, The Atlantic City Press.

Giuliani stopped by the seaside town to help raise money for the state Senator, Nicholas Asselta, while also campaigning in a town that quite friendly towards the republican party. It was a I will scratch your back if you scratch mine type of deal.

He also spoke on the lawn of the Congress Hall which a historic building in Cape May where other presidents have stayed, however he is the first presidential candidate to visit the hotel during a campaign. His speech mainly consisted of bashing Clinton which must have become mundane for the democrats out there. But the real excitement was at the end of speech where he said "We need a Democratic candidate who, the day after the convention, is going to double and triple the size of his offices in New Jersey," the Republican said. "And that candidate is me. And you know who's going to elect me president of the United States? The state of New Jersey." Maybe he is getting confused with which party he is running for because of all the talk in the media that he is too liberal to be a conservative.

Covering a Nuclear Leak and Bullshit Writing

The readings for this week were the Assessment of Media Performance of the Three Mile Island event, Politics and English Language and Five Characteristics of Academic or Scholarly Prose.
The assessment of media performance of the three mile island was very interesting, specially since in class we had a fake news conference on the same emergency and then had to write about it. It really gave me the perspective that the reporters had when they had to report about the nuclear leak. The chapter hit on a few major topics: the importance of numerous sources, sensationalism, and understanding the technical scientific part of the emergency. I really liked how the journalists that were interviewed stressed that it was very important to interview more than one person or company for a story as big as the Three Mile Island. The journalists were not about to believe everything the company told them and that is very smart. Of course the nuclear plant does not want the public to know that the nuclear leak was a bigger deal than they were trying to make it seem. It was the journalists' duty to give the public all the information they could find on the topic and display it in a non-basis way. However, some journalists went too far and made the story much bigger than it should have. This usually happens with a story that is so competitive, there is alot of pressure to have the best story. The one aspect that I liked that the chapter mentioned was that the journalist had to deal with all the scientific information about nuclear plants. That is where I was lost when I had to write the story for class on Three Mile Island. As a journalist major I never even took chemistry so I was very confused about the whole workings of nuclear elements (or whatever its called, see I really do not understand science). I imagine that the real reporters of the Three Mile Island felt similar. In a situation like that I would have called up any nuclear experts I could find to have them figure it out and have them be my sources.

The other two readings talked about scholarly writing and the excess of words that many people use to convey a message. The whole time I was thinking about my friends and how when they have to write an essay for a class and they do not have any idea what to write they say "Well, I can just bullshit it." Pretty much meaning, they will just talk around the topic with lots of huge scholarly sounding words. This however just does not work in journalism because the purpose of journalism is to report facts to the public on news. Being concise is very much stressed in this field of writing and you just cannot publish "bullshit." I really liked George Orwell's quote "If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought."

The Curiosity of a Journalist

The readings for this week dealt with news releases and speeches. From both chapters I got the jest that in order to be successful at both news releases and speeches you have to research and question everything. When you are handed a news release you have to think from all different angles, incorporating experts and the people's opinion and check to make sure that the facts are correct. For speeches, a reporter should come to the speech with knowledge of the speaker and the topic. A reporter must be a curious person.
I also think that both chapters stressed that in no matter what situation a reporter should only write what they know. Recently this has been very emphasized in class. Truthfully, I think it is one of the most important things to remember in journalism, if not THE most important thing to remember. Reporting false information is horrible reporting.

I just read an article on The Caucus, New York Time's political blog, about the four Republican candidates (Giuliani, Romney, Thompson and McCain) that did not show up for a Republican presidential debate at Morgan State University.
What? Not showing up for a chance to campaign? The catch here is that Morgan State University in Maryland is a historically black college.
The relevance of the school to the political party did not surpass anyone. It is a fact that in the last election the majority of black voters voted democrat.
I liked the point that Kansas Senator Sam Brownback made- "I think it’s a disgrace for our country, I think it’s bad for our party and I don’t think it’s good for our future,” he said. “You grow political parties by expanding your base … what they’re doing is sending a message of narrowing the base.”
I feel like the republication party has really been narrowing their base. They know that Americans are not too happy with Bush, yet they are not making their stances on issues any more moderate. Then they dismiss an opportunity to attract more people to their party? It is almost like they are too over confident. Or they just over cramming their fund-raising and campaigning schedules?

The readings for this week were about news on the Internet. As a college student I try to buy a newspaper once a week, but then again, why do that when you can get free news from sites like Google. I can really understand why online news is a booming medium for journalism. It is quick, easy and free (for the most part).

The one reading talked about the power of blogging. I want to write for ImPrint, an online magazine for college students and at the meeting they talked about how important it is to be accurate when writing stories for them. What you write will stay online for who knows how long and will be forever associated with whoever said or did it. When something is printed in a newspaper there is the buzz around the newest headline but the next day there is an even newer headline and the news the day before is forgotten. In this new age of journalism it is easy to just type in someones name and find anything that was printed about them. It is easier to remember people's mistakes.

The other reading talked about multimedia in online news. I am a huge fan of multimedia because I am a "visual learner." Sure I can understand something when I read it but I understand it so much better if I see pictures, video or some type of interactive packet. I think as far as online news goes, multimedia is the most exciting feature because it is something print does not have and really can not do.

I recently saw an article in a past issue of Rolling Stone stated that Rudy Giuliani could be worse than Bush. This article didn't surprise me, because Rolling Stone is a very liberal publication. However, the article that did surprise me was on Google News today. It said that Giuliani is losing popularity among his party because of his social stance (he is pro-choice).
Basically he is just too conservative for the liberals and too liberal for the conservatives.

I personally did not know that Giuliani was pro-choice and when I went to investigate this I found out that he technically is NOT pro-choice. He has taken the stance that abortions should only be performed if the mother's health is at risk. This is really not the type of pro-choice stance that liberals are talking about and it seemed like a pretty conservative value to me. Then I remembered the past post I did on the polls of Americans and who they were likely to vote for. Many mentioned that Giuliani has multiple past wives. Are his lifestyle choices the "social stance" the Google news article were really talking about?

I think that when it comes to politicians, people should look at how they perform in their career, not what happens in their private life. But, I feel like this could never actually happen. Just like the tabloids cannot ignore the lives of famous actors and singers. Where should the line be drawn to distinguish private life from business?

:) ;^] :/

I think no matter what level course you are taking in writing there will ALWAYS be a review of punctuation. I am not against the review because I always need the refresher. When I write I tend to just spill it all out onto my computer. Although this technique (if you could even call it a technique) is effective for racking up the wordage, it tends to just end up being a long ramble without all the necessary punctuation for emphasis and understanding. That's where my editing time comes in, hopefully when I reread what I just wrote I can catch where I need to insert some directions for the reader. I think of punctuation as directions for readers because it tells them where to pause or to stop all together, or emphasizes certain parts of a sentence. I had one professor that referred to punctuation as road signs. This makes sense since road signs and punctuation do the same thing, provide a warning or directions how to navigate a path, whether it is on pavement or paper.

The other reading for this week was the three chapters of my news reporting text. Basically it was an introduction to journalism. Another review. The most important thing they mentioned was relevance. I know last year I learned that when you are writing for a newspaper you only have a certain number of words to get your message across. If you waste half of them on something that is not the news then you have only half to get your message across.

Watch Out Hillary, Oprah's in the Race

The big news on the Election 2008 candidates seems to be Oprah's incredibly expensive fund-raising party for Obama. Found on the Times Online.

The guests of the party had to pay $2,300 in order to even go and were required to wear flat shoes so that Oprah's lawn wouldn't be damaged. Guests were not even allowed in her $50 million mansion which she considered to be a spirtual, sacred and special. The party raised 3 million dollars for Obama.

Oprah is a very influential person, the 2nd most influential woman in the US. Ironicly, first is Hillary Clinton. Her power has possibilities to push Obama's popularity way up on the scale. However, could it overshadow him? I think it could.

The articles I read on the party did not confirm if Oprah would be supporting Obama with any other election events or appearances but I suspect this is not the end. She was quoted saying “My money isn’t going to make any difference. My support of him is probably worth more than any check that I could write." Come November 2008, her support for Obama could end up being a battle between the two most influential woman in the US.

The Future of the News Media

The readings from the textbook were a good review. Chapters seven and eight went over the inverted pyramid, which is what every journalist must know. Basically the inverted pyramid is an upside-down triangle, with all the important information at the top and the smaller, less important details towards the bottom. The lead is in first sentence of the story and must include information that is not only important but also eye-catching for the reader. A good news story will entice the reader to read the whole story, even to the last details at the end.

The other reading was from Journalism.org, The State of the News Media. In my Journalism Research class last semester we went over the future of the news and discussed the possibility of print news becoming non-existent. This report addressed the same issue. I think that is normal for print sales to go down when such a variety of news is available online in a much faster, concise form. However, I do not think that newspapers and magazines will disappear anytime soon. There are still people who cherish the tradition of sitting down to breakfast with a fresh newspaper (like my father).

One factor that was discussed in the print vs. online issue is that local news is seldom addressed in online news sites. People who live in a small town need to be informed about the news in their local community not just the city nearby. Local newspapers do not have the staff to create elaborate websites so for this reason; print will continue to be a staple for the news in the town. I know that in the town I come from the website for our local newspaper is actually a scanned front page from the newspaper that week. http://www.starandwave.com I think that could even be considered a protest to battle against online news.

No Moderates Allowed

As far as the 2008 election candidates go, both democrats and republicans can agree on one thing, the uncertainty of which candidate is best for their party. In Tuesday's New York Times and on the Times website citizens from each party were randomly polled. Overall, people seemed to agree that it is very early on to really favor one candidate over the others. Especially since Thompson hasn't even offically entered the race. However, the differences in preferences between the parties are drastic. I see this as meaning that there will be very voters caught in the middle. In the 2008 election you are either a republican or a democrat. There will be few moderate stances.
Many of the polled pro-democratic people seemed to hold more favor for Hilary Clinton, which I feel many republicans would never vote for. The republicans that were polled seemed to focus on their candidate’s personal lifestyle choices, such as Giuliani's past three wives. I find it hard to believe them wanting to vote for Clinton because of her history, and maybe even because she is a woman.
My impression from the people polled, both democrats and republicans, is that this upcoming race is going to get more intense as November 2008 gets closer. With such different candidates and opinions it is difficult to say which side is going to take the lead.