Okay so that's a blatant lie.
I am definitely not done with semester one. In fact, I have only finished one of my courses after the shocking exam this morning. However, I am almost done - the finish line is in sight - and that makes me rather joyful.
I have had such an interesting first semester at Uni. Throughout this semester, I have been far too relaxed, far too lazy and, as of late, far too stressed. And yet, I have very much enjoyed my semester of JOUR1111... So much so that I'm going to stick with it next semester (which is of significance because I am switching out of my other degree). So it goes to show that I liked this class... a lot. I definitely think that I can get used to the way the things work in a Journalism and Communication degree. I've definitely had a lot more fun in this subject compared to my others (and no I'm not saying all of this to get a better grade).
I think we learnt a lot this semester and yet it was all manageable - probably helped by the fact that we had to review each lecture on here which helped me to remember the content. I thought it was a good introduction to the degree and it really got me thinking critically about the technical side to the news. A lot of it was things that I had noticed but couldn't really identify such as news values or news worthiness. Those are concepts that you understand but can't really explain unless you do a class such as JOUR1111. I liked that there were many things that I could easily see at work after each class. For example: the sound lecture - after I had listened to that and seen the proper technique for interviewing someone and heard their tips I could see how this would apply to my own interview for my story telling assignment. I did apply those techniques (successfully, in my opinion, ha ha). I also loved the way that the grades were spread over many small assignments so that it was easy to manage and to do well if you put the effort in - so thank you for that course coordinator :) I also thought that the assignments were interesting & fun to do which I can see from the amount of time I spent on this blog as opposed to long, boring essays that I had to complete for other classes. I feel like I have a new appreciation for social media following the media use diary and using my student twitter account. I now have my own twitter account and it would be an understatement to say that I'm hooked.
I have a long way to go (literally - I have years left of my degree), but I'm looking forward to it. I look forward to defining my 'brand' of Journalism and seeing where it takes me. I look forward to learning how to present the news in the plethora of ways that are available to Journalism students in 2012. Basically, I look forward to learning more.
In conclusion, after 27 blog posts I can safely say, I have thoroughly enjoyed this course and I look forward to extending my foray into the world of Journalism.
Thank you very much for reading.
Till next semester....
I bid you, dear reader, adieu!
Thursday, 14 June 2012
Week 13: What's In It For Me?
The Last Supper... Oh oops, I meant Lecture*
The last lecture was given by a very funny man by the name of Steve Molks.
He was incredibly interesting and amusing. His witty comments and personality is just like I would have imagined from reading all the stuff on his website (but luckily I didn't have to imagine because I got to see him present the lecture in the flesh which was a very enjoyable experience). I listened to him for that reason, and also the fact that with 4,588 twitter followers, I feel he knows what he's talking about.
He talked about our personal brands and how we can start developing them now and it really got me thinking about how that is exactly what I'm doing. Prior to this JOUR1111 I had my own tumblr account but I hadn't really thought about my 'brand' very much. I had looked at my blog often and tried to analyze whether it was flowing nicely and not looking like a bunch of random posts thrown together but I hadn't really recognized that, in doing that (analyzing it, etc) I had actually been formulating/maintaining a form of brand that I was trying to convey through my blog. Now, with every blog post I write on here and every tweet I've sent out on my class twitter account, I've always thought carefully about whether I'm sticking to the style I'm aiming for. I finish this class having made my own twitter account and so far I've been trying to give due thought to what 'brand' I am presenting through it. Particularly how I can make it work for me.
I liked what he said about having access to people on TV, journalists, politicians, etc. His point was exemplified by the fact that the other day when I wanted to ask Steve about the D'Arcy/Monk story (see last blog post) and so I tweeted to him and got a response back within a few hours. It's true that we have access to people like never before and it's up to us (the journalists of the future) to use this to our advantage.
Not only that but we have a range of mediums at our finger tips. WE CAN BE JOURNALISTS... NOW! For example, if I want to start writing, I don't need to be hired to reach an audience. I can write a blog, I can tweet about it. I may not reach a large audience in this way but it's a start, and who knows? If I'm any good at it, it might lead to something. But the point is that I can reach people with my thoughts and my content. And that's exciting!
I also appreciated that he said that he'd improved - that's what I'm aiming for and it's nice to hear from someone, who has been successful with their work already, that they're trying to improve as well & that they've gotten better over time.
In conclusion: good times.
The last lecture was given by a very funny man by the name of Steve Molks.
He was incredibly interesting and amusing. His witty comments and personality is just like I would have imagined from reading all the stuff on his website (but luckily I didn't have to imagine because I got to see him present the lecture in the flesh which was a very enjoyable experience). I listened to him for that reason, and also the fact that with 4,588 twitter followers, I feel he knows what he's talking about.
He talked about our personal brands and how we can start developing them now and it really got me thinking about how that is exactly what I'm doing. Prior to this JOUR1111 I had my own tumblr account but I hadn't really thought about my 'brand' very much. I had looked at my blog often and tried to analyze whether it was flowing nicely and not looking like a bunch of random posts thrown together but I hadn't really recognized that, in doing that (analyzing it, etc) I had actually been formulating/maintaining a form of brand that I was trying to convey through my blog. Now, with every blog post I write on here and every tweet I've sent out on my class twitter account, I've always thought carefully about whether I'm sticking to the style I'm aiming for. I finish this class having made my own twitter account and so far I've been trying to give due thought to what 'brand' I am presenting through it. Particularly how I can make it work for me.
I liked what he said about having access to people on TV, journalists, politicians, etc. His point was exemplified by the fact that the other day when I wanted to ask Steve about the D'Arcy/Monk story (see last blog post) and so I tweeted to him and got a response back within a few hours. It's true that we have access to people like never before and it's up to us (the journalists of the future) to use this to our advantage.
Not only that but we have a range of mediums at our finger tips. WE CAN BE JOURNALISTS... NOW! For example, if I want to start writing, I don't need to be hired to reach an audience. I can write a blog, I can tweet about it. I may not reach a large audience in this way but it's a start, and who knows? If I'm any good at it, it might lead to something. But the point is that I can reach people with my thoughts and my content. And that's exciting!
I also appreciated that he said that he'd improved - that's what I'm aiming for and it's nice to hear from someone, who has been successful with their work already, that they're trying to improve as well & that they've gotten better over time.
In conclusion: good times.
Wednesday, 13 June 2012
My two cents worth...
Nick D'Arcy and Kenrick Monk are in the firing range (pardon the pun, I couldn't help myself) of the national media after posting photos of themselves with guns on their facebook pages.
I have two problems with this...
1) Why they would be stupid enough to do that and to allow people access to the photos (come on, privacy settings anyone?)
and
2) Why does everyone care?
I know that my views on this will be very controversial to some and people will probably disagree with me wholeheartedly. However, as a journalism student, I feel that it is necessary to address what is being talked about in the media and weigh in on the subject.
Firstly, the boys obviously did a stupid thing by posting photos of themselves with guns on their facebook pages. Whether or not they should be treated as role models because they are on the national swim team is another argument altogether (and one that is talked about a lot in the media, especially when our rugby boys get into mischief - which is far too often), they are in the public eye and thus this was probably not the best idea they've ever had. I personally disagree that posting that photo caused much harm, except perhaps on their reputations, but being a member of the younger generation myself, I don't see this photo and immediately think that posing with guns is 'cool' or something to aspire to do simply because these two are on the national swim team. Sometimes, I feel that small offenses are taken far too seriously when Australian sporting icons are involved. Yet, other offenses (particularly D'Arcy's last run in with the law) do warrant serious action. It can easily be argued that the media is definitely responsible for much of the hype regarding sports stars messing up, because such stories get a lot of priority in the news. Whether this is how it should be or not, they are considered news worthy by the media and I don't see this changing any time soon.
Secondly, I'm quite frankly shocked that such serious measures have been taken by the AOC and Swimming Australia. Swimming Australia The AOC (Australian Olympic Committee) have excluded D'Arcy and Monk from attending the closing ceremony and ordered them to avoid using social media at all during the games. Monk mentioned that it was not the act itself of going to the rifle range but the act of posting the photos on Facebook that the organizations had objected to. As we all know, D'Arcy is no angel and boys will be boys but is it the role of the AOC and Swimming Australia to act as the boys' parents and ban them from using social media? Does the offense of posting a questionable photo on Facebook really warrant being banned from the closing ceremony?
Evidently, both Monk and D'Arcy have displayed poor judgement but what they did was perfectly legal... Referring back to the discussion we had in class about advertisements being unethical vs. in poor taste, we see here a perfect example of something being ethical (considering the fact that they didn't break any laws) yet in bad taste (since some would consider them role models/ambassadors for Australian sport). Additionally, Swimming Australia organized for the team to visit a firing range for a 'team bonding exercise' in 2007... and are now saying that posting photos of the two doing it again is 'inappropriate'? That in itself is very questionable.
I know that people may disagree with me but this my merely my thoughts on the subject so take from it what you will.
NOTE: I have recently opened my own twitter account and added Steve Molks after the last lecture because I loved his lecture and I love hearing his thoughts. I 'tweeted' to him asking about his view on the subject and he agreed with me that it's a massive media-led over reaction! I think I'm finally seeing how awesome twitter can be and how interesting it is to be in contact with people in the field. Hopefully, I can have more of these types of interactions as I continue with my journalism studies.
NOTE: I have recently opened my own twitter account and added Steve Molks after the last lecture because I loved his lecture and I love hearing his thoughts. I 'tweeted' to him asking about his view on the subject and he agreed with me that it's a massive media-led over reaction! I think I'm finally seeing how awesome twitter can be and how interesting it is to be in contact with people in the field. Hopefully, I can have more of these types of interactions as I continue with my journalism studies.
Sunday, 10 June 2012
Big Fat Gypsy Weddings
Lately, with the burden of upcoming exams resting heavily on my shoulders, I have been watching "Big Fat Gypsy Weddings" on youtube for a bit of light-hearted relief. This (not too serious) documentary focuses on the lives of gypsies in Great Britain.
Of course a lot of the time it is about weddings and the incredible dresses/cakes/festivities that the gypsies enjoy on their big day but it is also about the culture, relationships, gender roles and society's increasing influence and pressure on day to day gypsy life.
No doubt their lives are very different to my own, which is why it is interesting in the first place. I always strive to watch documentaries and read books about cultures different from my own and that I struggle to comprehend. I love reading about ways of life that are polar opposite to my own. For example, I like to read and gain knowledge about Amish communities and African tribes. It isn't knowledge that I use on a daily basis but it does give me insights into how other people live and operate which is always of interest to me (which I guess is why I'm studying sociology in some regard).
The gypsies (also known as travelers) live a very unique style of life. Their clothing is very unique and they have very strict expectations about the roles of males and females in their community. Even their style of courtship is very dissimilar to ours. I don't necessarily agree with the constraints that are placed on women in their community but it is something that is a part of their culture so that's not for me to judge.
After that lengthy introduction, the main reason why I'm blogging about this show is that I really like the way it has been approached. The most important feature I appreciate is the link between our world and theirs. Obviously, there is a large level of conflict and confusion between gypsies and non-gypsies, and I believe a lot of this stems from the fact that gypsies have a bad reputation in the UK and also that they are very secretive so it's hard to really understand their lives. I really like how the producers of this documentary have made the link between the two worlds a bridal dressmaker. The dressmaker, who is not a gypsy, makes many dresses for gypsy life-cycle functions. She has, therefore, spent a lot of time with gypsies and has attended many traveler festivities. She often gives gems of wisdom about the differences between their cultures and ours and how it is important not to judge them merely for being different. Her insight into the community is unheard of for a non-traveler so it is the perfect perspective for the producers to take advantage of.
As a journalism student, it is important for me to recognize and appreciate what may seem like small aspects like this. This documentary has shown me how you can find unlikely candidates that perfectly fill a very necessary role... it just takes some searching around. I honestly cannot think of a better character, than the non-gypsy, dressmaker who mostly makes gypsy wedding dresses, to be the voice of understanding and tolerance between the two worlds.
Another aspect of this documentary that I like is the balance between the somber moments where they discuss the challenges that the gypsies face in preserving their way of life and the times that their houses have been knocked down by the government and the more light, bright and happy moments when they are getting married or celebrating religious occasions.
Whatever your view on the gypsies and their lifestyle, this documentary is worth watching. I have enjoyed it immensely and it's become a lot more to me than just a study break. I have gained a new perspective on the gypsy people and their culture and I've also learnt some things about making and producing documentaries.
Of course a lot of the time it is about weddings and the incredible dresses/cakes/festivities that the gypsies enjoy on their big day but it is also about the culture, relationships, gender roles and society's increasing influence and pressure on day to day gypsy life.
No doubt their lives are very different to my own, which is why it is interesting in the first place. I always strive to watch documentaries and read books about cultures different from my own and that I struggle to comprehend. I love reading about ways of life that are polar opposite to my own. For example, I like to read and gain knowledge about Amish communities and African tribes. It isn't knowledge that I use on a daily basis but it does give me insights into how other people live and operate which is always of interest to me (which I guess is why I'm studying sociology in some regard).
The gypsies (also known as travelers) live a very unique style of life. Their clothing is very unique and they have very strict expectations about the roles of males and females in their community. Even their style of courtship is very dissimilar to ours. I don't necessarily agree with the constraints that are placed on women in their community but it is something that is a part of their culture so that's not for me to judge.
After that lengthy introduction, the main reason why I'm blogging about this show is that I really like the way it has been approached. The most important feature I appreciate is the link between our world and theirs. Obviously, there is a large level of conflict and confusion between gypsies and non-gypsies, and I believe a lot of this stems from the fact that gypsies have a bad reputation in the UK and also that they are very secretive so it's hard to really understand their lives. I really like how the producers of this documentary have made the link between the two worlds a bridal dressmaker. The dressmaker, who is not a gypsy, makes many dresses for gypsy life-cycle functions. She has, therefore, spent a lot of time with gypsies and has attended many traveler festivities. She often gives gems of wisdom about the differences between their cultures and ours and how it is important not to judge them merely for being different. Her insight into the community is unheard of for a non-traveler so it is the perfect perspective for the producers to take advantage of.
As a journalism student, it is important for me to recognize and appreciate what may seem like small aspects like this. This documentary has shown me how you can find unlikely candidates that perfectly fill a very necessary role... it just takes some searching around. I honestly cannot think of a better character, than the non-gypsy, dressmaker who mostly makes gypsy wedding dresses, to be the voice of understanding and tolerance between the two worlds.
Another aspect of this documentary that I like is the balance between the somber moments where they discuss the challenges that the gypsies face in preserving their way of life and the times that their houses have been knocked down by the government and the more light, bright and happy moments when they are getting married or celebrating religious occasions.
Whatever your view on the gypsies and their lifestyle, this documentary is worth watching. I have enjoyed it immensely and it's become a lot more to me than just a study break. I have gained a new perspective on the gypsy people and their culture and I've also learnt some things about making and producing documentaries.
Monday, 4 June 2012
"Our Audience Is Our Only Agenda"
The Global Mail is a philanthropically funded, not-for-profit news and features website. Our mission is to deliver original, fearless, independent journalism.
The statement above is essentially the reason why I love The Global Mail. While my cynical self struggles to comprehend that any media source would be completely agenda-less, as they claim to be, I still love the ethos and mentality behind The Global Mail. I respect the methods (for example; the fact that they have an 'Editorial Advisory Committee' to make sure they produce content that fits with their standards) that they have undertaken in order to stay true to the aim of their mission statement. Not only this, but their content isn't the same 'hot' stories that are on every single news site you click onto. The content is quirky, interesting, fresh and different.
So, if you haven't visited their website yet, I really do recommend that you check it out: http://www.theglobalmail.org/
The statement above is essentially the reason why I love The Global Mail. While my cynical self struggles to comprehend that any media source would be completely agenda-less, as they claim to be, I still love the ethos and mentality behind The Global Mail. I respect the methods (for example; the fact that they have an 'Editorial Advisory Committee' to make sure they produce content that fits with their standards) that they have undertaken in order to stay true to the aim of their mission statement. Not only this, but their content isn't the same 'hot' stories that are on every single news site you click onto. The content is quirky, interesting, fresh and different.
So, if you haven't visited their website yet, I really do recommend that you check it out: http://www.theglobalmail.org/
Friday, 1 June 2012
40 Of The Most Powerful Photographs Ever Taken
STOP, just STOP whatever else you're doing and check this out:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/expresident/most-powerful-photographs-ever-taken
Absolutely amazing.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/expresident/most-powerful-photographs-ever-taken
Absolutely amazing.
Week 12: Investigative Journalism
Another week,
another great lecture.
This week we
discussed investigative journalism. I particularly liked the quote by Lord
Northcliffe:
"News is what
somebody somewhere wants to suppress, all the rest is advertising."
Firstly,
we talked about the ‘in’s of investigative journalism:
-
intelligent
-
informed
-
intuitive
-
inside
-
invest
I agreed
with all of these except with ‘inside’ which Dr. Redman pointed out could
almost be considered synonymous with ‘intimate’. This implies that the subject
or the source needs to trust you. However, I thought it would be somewhat
questionable to get someone to trust you and then potentially destroy that
trust depending on the spin the article has. I particularly agreed with
‘invest’ since investigative journalism seems to be something that one would
have to put a lot of time and effort into as well as resources. My belief was
confirmed in the next slide when we were told that a deeper definition of
investigative journalism included “critical and thorough journalism”, with
thorough meaning that the journalism makes a substantial effort regarding the
time spent, sources consulted and thorough approach needed.
Another
point that I found intriguing was the one of the key purposes of investigative
journalism is: ‘to provide a voice for those without one and to hold the
powerful to account’ by the Centre for Investigation Journalism (City
University London). However, I
felt that this lacked an essential aspect ‘to hold the powerful accountable for the
voice that they have’. I think that investigative journalism must ensure
that the powerful are held accountable for all the luxuries that they enjoy
including an influential voice that can impact greatly on people who do not
share the same privileges.
One
point that definitely made me think was that Dr. Redman put ‘sceptical not
cynical’ on the slide about the key aspects of investigative journalism. I
think this is a good point because there is a fine line between the two and I
believe it would be easy to succumb to being overly cynical after spending too
much time working with investigative journalism.
I
also thoroughly enjoyed learning about the ‘trailblazers’ because it gave me a
fresh wave of inspiration to stick to journalism because of how important it
was, is and can be J
On
a side note: We watched a documentary in the tutorial this week and whilst we
agreed that Wikileaks is not really journalism since it is more of an
information dump, which provides the information for journalists to ‘pick through’
according to Dr. Redman, in the documentary Julian Assange claimed that he does
associate himself with the term ‘journalist’ but more so with the term
‘activist’. So that really gave me something to think about, and although I am
naturally partial to Dr. Redman’s argument since he is my lecturer, I think he
is right.
Week 11: Agenda Setting
Agenda Setting
The four agendas (all interrelated):
1) Public agenda - the set of topics that members of the public perceive as important.
2) Policy agenda - issues that decision makers think are salient.
3) Corporate agenda - issues that big businesses & corporations think are important.
4) Media agenda - issues discussed in the media.
Two very important points were raised in this lecture:
a) the mass media do not merely reflect and report reality, they filter and shape it.
b) media concentration on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those issues as more important than other issues.
I think this is very important for myself and my peers in JOUR1111 to keep in mind because evidently we cannot allow ourselves to be spoon fed by the media and manipulated into conforming with their views of what is important (because they have their own agendas that they are trying to push). And also, it promotes the idea that we should try to get our news from a variety of different sources because we don't want to know about just one view on a particular story. This is also related to Media Dependence - since we are all so media dependent, it would suggest that we would be more susceptible to media agenda setting (according to the lecture) so we must be aware of it.
To look at this point I looked at 4 news sources online and focused on one story: George Zimmerman's (man who killed Trayvon Martin) bail being revoked.
The Australian - in the breaking news section, 6 sentences, no photo (just bare minimum facts)
The Courier Mail - exactly the same as 'The Australian' story (must have shared the story)
Aljazeera - headliner article, big photo, much longer story (around 20 sentences) with a lot more information
CNN - under the 'more news' section, video of the court scene as well as extensive information
From looking at this, I saw that the different news sites (for whatever reasons, perhaps proximity, or other perceived values contributing to news worthiness) had given the story different levels of prominence on their site and had written to different lengths on the story. Therefore, I could see how agenda setting affected the presentation of the story by different sites.
I definitely think things are definitely on the agenda at the moment such as climate change, etc. It will be interesting now to watch the news because, now that I am aware of agenda setting, I will be on the watch to see what current issues the media are prioritizing and trying to push into the spotlight. Personally, this lecture was not exactly about learning something new but rather becoming aware of something that is and has been going on for as long as the media has been around. Everyone has an agenda but as budding journalists, it is of the upmost importance for us to recognize what agendas people are following and be more informed as a result and know not to take everything that we are told as truth and reality.
The four agendas (all interrelated):
1) Public agenda - the set of topics that members of the public perceive as important.
2) Policy agenda - issues that decision makers think are salient.
3) Corporate agenda - issues that big businesses & corporations think are important.
4) Media agenda - issues discussed in the media.
Two very important points were raised in this lecture:
a) the mass media do not merely reflect and report reality, they filter and shape it.
b) media concentration on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those issues as more important than other issues.
I think this is very important for myself and my peers in JOUR1111 to keep in mind because evidently we cannot allow ourselves to be spoon fed by the media and manipulated into conforming with their views of what is important (because they have their own agendas that they are trying to push). And also, it promotes the idea that we should try to get our news from a variety of different sources because we don't want to know about just one view on a particular story. This is also related to Media Dependence - since we are all so media dependent, it would suggest that we would be more susceptible to media agenda setting (according to the lecture) so we must be aware of it.
To look at this point I looked at 4 news sources online and focused on one story: George Zimmerman's (man who killed Trayvon Martin) bail being revoked.
The Australian - in the breaking news section, 6 sentences, no photo (just bare minimum facts)
The Courier Mail - exactly the same as 'The Australian' story (must have shared the story)
Aljazeera - headliner article, big photo, much longer story (around 20 sentences) with a lot more information
CNN - under the 'more news' section, video of the court scene as well as extensive information
From looking at this, I saw that the different news sites (for whatever reasons, perhaps proximity, or other perceived values contributing to news worthiness) had given the story different levels of prominence on their site and had written to different lengths on the story. Therefore, I could see how agenda setting affected the presentation of the story by different sites.
I definitely think things are definitely on the agenda at the moment such as climate change, etc. It will be interesting now to watch the news because, now that I am aware of agenda setting, I will be on the watch to see what current issues the media are prioritizing and trying to push into the spotlight. Personally, this lecture was not exactly about learning something new but rather becoming aware of something that is and has been going on for as long as the media has been around. Everyone has an agenda but as budding journalists, it is of the upmost importance for us to recognize what agendas people are following and be more informed as a result and know not to take everything that we are told as truth and reality.
Thursday, 31 May 2012
Something exciting...
About a week and a half ago, I put a photo on the "I am UniQue" facebook page to try to win a camera.
This photo to be exact:
This photo was taken as a part of the photoshoot my school organised for my graduating class. This is on the Great Wall of China (no we didn't fly all the way there, I graduated from high school in Beijing).
Well, it didn't happen. HOWEVER, I was selected as a person that would take part in a photoshoot and give a short interview, which was equally cool :)
So today, I had a very busyyy morning. I then trudged across campus, after jumping in the shower, to the Joyce Ackroyd Building. Little did I know it was about to pour with rain so I did not bring an umbrella. BIG MISTAKE. However, I did use my lecture notebook, for a completely useless class that I'm taking (not JOUR1111, I promise), so I was only partially soaked through. When I turned up for the interview, shoes in hand, book over head and dripping (3 minutes late as well - very sorry about that guys), I probably looked like something the cat wouldn't bother to drag in. However, everybody was very welcoming and soon I was standing on a pedestal "working it" in front of the camera.
It was so much fun! I had met both Matthew & Allie before from doing the free JACS workshops in photography, and Ms. Rooney was my tutor for JOUR1111 so I was lucky to be working with people I already had met, though I am positive that they would have made anyone feel relaxed because of their encouraging and friendly manner. This is something I noticed and appreciated, and I would like to imitate in the future when I am interviewing people because it was very effective in enabling me (as the subject) to open up and feel comfortable.
The photoshoot was somewhat awkward for me but since my father is an avid photographer I'm quite used to it so it wasn't too bad. And hey, who doesn't like to be told that they look great and are photogenic? (Although, since I was looking like I'd just fallen in a pond, I'm sure they were just being kind). The interview was also good fun!
Though this activity, I was exposed to what interviewing is like so I was really lucky and grateful to have this experience. It was an amazing chance for me to see what these things take to be produced and what it's like 'behind the scenes'. I think that it will be helpful when it's my turn to start producing things for my journalism career :) THANK YOU TO THE PEOPLE INVOLVED & JACS!
This photo to be exact:
This photo was taken as a part of the photoshoot my school organised for my graduating class. This is on the Great Wall of China (no we didn't fly all the way there, I graduated from high school in Beijing).
Well, it didn't happen. HOWEVER, I was selected as a person that would take part in a photoshoot and give a short interview, which was equally cool :)
So today, I had a very busyyy morning. I then trudged across campus, after jumping in the shower, to the Joyce Ackroyd Building. Little did I know it was about to pour with rain so I did not bring an umbrella. BIG MISTAKE. However, I did use my lecture notebook, for a completely useless class that I'm taking (not JOUR1111, I promise), so I was only partially soaked through. When I turned up for the interview, shoes in hand, book over head and dripping (3 minutes late as well - very sorry about that guys), I probably looked like something the cat wouldn't bother to drag in. However, everybody was very welcoming and soon I was standing on a pedestal "working it" in front of the camera.
It was so much fun! I had met both Matthew & Allie before from doing the free JACS workshops in photography, and Ms. Rooney was my tutor for JOUR1111 so I was lucky to be working with people I already had met, though I am positive that they would have made anyone feel relaxed because of their encouraging and friendly manner. This is something I noticed and appreciated, and I would like to imitate in the future when I am interviewing people because it was very effective in enabling me (as the subject) to open up and feel comfortable.
The photoshoot was somewhat awkward for me but since my father is an avid photographer I'm quite used to it so it wasn't too bad. And hey, who doesn't like to be told that they look great and are photogenic? (Although, since I was looking like I'd just fallen in a pond, I'm sure they were just being kind). The interview was also good fun!
Though this activity, I was exposed to what interviewing is like so I was really lucky and grateful to have this experience. It was an amazing chance for me to see what these things take to be produced and what it's like 'behind the scenes'. I think that it will be helpful when it's my turn to start producing things for my journalism career :) THANK YOU TO THE PEOPLE INVOLVED & JACS!
Week 9: News Values
This week we discussed News Values.
This was probably one of my favorite lectures thus far in the course and this is why: RELEVANCE!
We basically looked at what news values are according to many many different sources. Essentially, news values determines the 'newsworthiness' of a story. Thus, the level of prominence a news sources gives a particular story and (as Dr. Redman put it) the attention that the audience pays to the story as a result.
I was so intrigued by this lecture because once we started to look at all the different news values determined by various people such as Galtung & Ruge and Golding & Elliott, I started to see how this can be applied to all major news stories.
For example: news values as defined by Galtung and Ruge (1965) were...
1) Negativity
2) Proximity
3) Recency
4) Currency
5) Continuity
6) Uniqueness
7) Simplicity
8) Personality
9) Expectedness
10) Elite Nations or People
11) Exclusivity
12) Size
Hence, when I tried to apply relevant news values to a current 'hot' story I saw how many corresponded with the level of prominence of the story.
I.e. The Story of Missing Mother - Allison Baden-Clay
What news values apply to this story?
1) Negativity - it is bad news (tragedy, possible death, etc)
2) Proximity - it occurred in Queensland and thus is close to home - audiences supposedly relate more to stories that are close to them geographically
3) Recency - the news broke soon after she was reported missing
5) Continuity - there is a big likelihood that this story will have a continuing impact as the search for her body continues
12) Size - the bigger impact a story has, the more people it affects, the more money/resources it involves, the higher it's value... a lot of people were affected by the story and involved in the search (which also required resources and people) and thus it was a story that had a high 'threshold'
So we can see that many popular news stories can be seen to relate to these prescribed news values.
Additionally, I feel that the three 'newsworthiness' hypotheses (as deemed by Galtung & Ruge) can be easily applied.
1) The additivity hypothesis that the more factors an event satisfies, the higher the probability that it becomes news.
2) The complementary hypothesis that the factors will tend to exclude each other.
3) The exclusion hypothesis that events that satisfy none or very few factors will usually not become news.
Particularly, the additivity hypothesis is seen as applicable to this story because it became such a popular news story and it satisfied many of the factors listed above.
The exclusion hypothesis is also important because when I was trying to apply news values on my preferred online news source I could see that none of them didn't satisfy any of the news value factors. So, clearly if the story doesn't satisfy enough of the factors, it simply isn't considered newsworthy.
Reiterating why I enjoyed this lecture so much and why I thought it was relevant is because I could actually apply this theory to real life journalism and when I looked at this theory in practice I could see it influencing the stories that were published on many news sites. Being able to understand how theory influences practice enables me to appreciate the theory more and better understand how to apply it.
In future, if I had to, I feel I would be able to better predict what sort of stories would be popular since I now know what sort of factors affect the newsworthiness of a story.
I think there are differences between what news values we hold dear today vs. the past. For example, as discussed in our tutorial, we seem to value stories and information regarding our health much more than the past. Health and wellness appears to be a 'trending' story in the media nowadays. In terms of what are tomorrow's news values... It's very hard to predict but since the news values determined by Galtung and Ruge were written in 1965 and they are still pertinent today then I believe they will remain determinant factors of newsworthiness well into the future.
Finally, what do I think is newsworthy? I think anything that informs or educates the public, raises awareness about something that the public should know about (regardless of whether they find it interesting) and, finally - though perhaps this is of less importance, things that people find entertaining as well.
This was probably one of my favorite lectures thus far in the course and this is why: RELEVANCE!
We basically looked at what news values are according to many many different sources. Essentially, news values determines the 'newsworthiness' of a story. Thus, the level of prominence a news sources gives a particular story and (as Dr. Redman put it) the attention that the audience pays to the story as a result.
I was so intrigued by this lecture because once we started to look at all the different news values determined by various people such as Galtung & Ruge and Golding & Elliott, I started to see how this can be applied to all major news stories.
For example: news values as defined by Galtung and Ruge (1965) were...
1) Negativity
2) Proximity
3) Recency
4) Currency
5) Continuity
6) Uniqueness
7) Simplicity
8) Personality
9) Expectedness
10) Elite Nations or People
11) Exclusivity
12) Size
Hence, when I tried to apply relevant news values to a current 'hot' story I saw how many corresponded with the level of prominence of the story.
I.e. The Story of Missing Mother - Allison Baden-Clay
What news values apply to this story?
1) Negativity - it is bad news (tragedy, possible death, etc)
2) Proximity - it occurred in Queensland and thus is close to home - audiences supposedly relate more to stories that are close to them geographically
3) Recency - the news broke soon after she was reported missing
5) Continuity - there is a big likelihood that this story will have a continuing impact as the search for her body continues
12) Size - the bigger impact a story has, the more people it affects, the more money/resources it involves, the higher it's value... a lot of people were affected by the story and involved in the search (which also required resources and people) and thus it was a story that had a high 'threshold'
So we can see that many popular news stories can be seen to relate to these prescribed news values.
Additionally, I feel that the three 'newsworthiness' hypotheses (as deemed by Galtung & Ruge) can be easily applied.
1) The additivity hypothesis that the more factors an event satisfies, the higher the probability that it becomes news.
2) The complementary hypothesis that the factors will tend to exclude each other.
3) The exclusion hypothesis that events that satisfy none or very few factors will usually not become news.
Particularly, the additivity hypothesis is seen as applicable to this story because it became such a popular news story and it satisfied many of the factors listed above.
The exclusion hypothesis is also important because when I was trying to apply news values on my preferred online news source I could see that none of them didn't satisfy any of the news value factors. So, clearly if the story doesn't satisfy enough of the factors, it simply isn't considered newsworthy.
Reiterating why I enjoyed this lecture so much and why I thought it was relevant is because I could actually apply this theory to real life journalism and when I looked at this theory in practice I could see it influencing the stories that were published on many news sites. Being able to understand how theory influences practice enables me to appreciate the theory more and better understand how to apply it.
In future, if I had to, I feel I would be able to better predict what sort of stories would be popular since I now know what sort of factors affect the newsworthiness of a story.
I think there are differences between what news values we hold dear today vs. the past. For example, as discussed in our tutorial, we seem to value stories and information regarding our health much more than the past. Health and wellness appears to be a 'trending' story in the media nowadays. In terms of what are tomorrow's news values... It's very hard to predict but since the news values determined by Galtung and Ruge were written in 1965 and they are still pertinent today then I believe they will remain determinant factors of newsworthiness well into the future.
Finally, what do I think is newsworthy? I think anything that informs or educates the public, raises awareness about something that the public should know about (regardless of whether they find it interesting) and, finally - though perhaps this is of less importance, things that people find entertaining as well.
Thursday, 24 May 2012
Annotated Bibliography
Word Count: 899
Reuters - Online News
Reuters - Online News
Slosson, M. (2012, May 20). Status update: Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg gets married. Reuters.com. Retrieved May 24, 2012, from http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/20/us-usa-facebook-marriage-idUSBRE84J01I20120520
This story, written by Mary Slosson and published
by well-respected news provider; Reuters, is effectively split into two parts.
The first is a description of the happenings during the wedding with details
such as Chan’s dress and the wedding dinner. The second half illustrates why
Zuckerberg’s marriage is newsworthy by stating that he was Times magazine’s
‘Person of the Year’ in 2010 and that he is worth over $20 billion. The details
Slosson provides in the story correlate with many of the accepted news values
such as; celebrity, good news, simplicity, relevance, personality and
continuity, thus conveying why this story is of public interest. Slosson gives details from other sources
such as ‘People’ magazine and ‘tweets’ from Tim Carvell of ‘The Daily Show’,
giving a well-rounded response to the news, which makes the article a credible
source. Although ‘People’ magazine may not be the type of news provider that
Reuters would usually source information from, because it is celebrity news
means that it is acceptable to use information from a source that specializes
in this. The article is written in a clear and concise manner and though just
496 words long, includes all the important information, such as the marriage
announcement and such. It also includes a small and superfluous photo gallery
containing one picture from the wedding and two paparazzi shots from their
recent holiday to Shanghai. Slosson concludes, in typical short story reporting
style; that the couple hadn’t responded for comment.
Good
Morning America - News Video
Harris, Dan (Anchor). (2012, May 21). Good Morning America [Television Broadcast]. New York, U.S.A.: ABC News.
Dan Harris of ABC news tells the story in a light-hearted
fashion but gives a good overall description of the event as well as hints at
what might have happened despite the secrecy that shrouded the event. The story
appears quite credible as ABC supports the story with pictures/video, enabled
by the medium. The fact that he is a celebrity and has an intriguingly private
personality, makes this story more fascinating. Similarly to the Reuters story,
it focuses on giving details that draw a parallel to the news values of the
piece such as his net worth and company. The video includes a clip from
Gizmodo’s Editor-in-chief Joe Brown about the style of the wedding announcement
and opinions from legal experts that the timing of the wedding will make it
more difficult for his new wife to legally claim any ownership on the company. Outsourcing
for expertise provides the video with a more educated tone. The video medium allows
the presenters to include photos of the venue, potential performers of the
wedding, the attendees as they arrived, the caterers and more, thus allowing
more details than the Reuters print story. Considering that this piece was
shown on a morning show (generally after the time most people leave for work),
it makes sense for the style of the piece to be very jocular, as it is not
targeting people who are looking for the most important news stories.
Media,
Culture & Society - Journal Article
Gorin, V., & Dubied, A. (2011). Desirable people: Identifying social values through celebrity news. Media, Culture & Society, 33(4), 599-618.
This journal article is especially well written
because it introduces the terms and develops the argument very clearly. It
starts out with defining ‘celebrity news’ and highlighting its relationship to
news values. Gorin and Dubied also explained the public interest in celebrity
behaviour. This article is well
researched with many sources from French and Western journals giving an
international perspective on the issue. The charts and subsequent analyses shed
light on topics such as the categories that represent the main themes
composing the events involving celebrities. It is interesting to note how many
of these categories relates to the news of Zuckerberg’s nuptials including;
relationships, love life, lifestyle, professional life and personality. The
research in the article is consistent with the aforementioned reasons why the
Zuckerberg story was treated with a high level of importance and is because the
general values of celebrity news, and primary news values in general, correlate
with the main aspects of the story. Moreover, we learn that whilst it is common
for bad news to attract high levels of media attention, it is true that good
news also has a weighty level of news worthiness in celebrity news. This
article gives an interesting and encompassing perspective on celebrity news
which analyses, in an in-depth manner, the interest and intrigue surrounding
celebrity news and how it constitutes as news.
Sarah & Vinnie – Radio Podcast
Sarah (presenter), Vinnie (presenter). (2012, May 21). Sarah & Vinnie [Radio series episode]. San Francisco, U.S.A.: CBS Local.
This form of media is a locally produced radio
podcast. It contrasted the other forms of media because it was much more
informal and less detail oriented, which could be attributed to the fact that
they don’t have access to the same level of information as more reputable news
operators. The program is hosted by CBS local media, which is a division of CBS
Radio Inc. They discussed his marriage, the ring, his company going public,
whether they signed a pre-nuptial agreement and if he will move out of his
current home which is rather modest. Despite not being highly factual, the medium
allows the presenters to give their opinion on the subject, which is not encouraged
in more traditional media outlets such as; Reuters for example. They avoided
giving specific information unlike the Reuters article and the ABC News video. Keeping
with the casual approach, there is no formal conclusion. This
source does not appear to be the most credible of news sources but it does
provide an alternative, entertaining style of presentation.
Reference List:
Gorin,
V., & Dubied, A. (2011). Desirable people: Identifying social values
through celebrity news. Media, Culture & Society, 33(4),
599-618.
Harris,
Dan (Anchor). (2012, May 21). Good
Morning America [Television Broadcast]. New York, U.S.A.: ABC News.
Slosson,
M. (2012, May 20). Status update: Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg gets married. Reuters.com.
Retrieved May 24, 2012, from http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/20/us-usa-facebook-marriage-idUSBRE84J01I20120520
Sarah
(presenter), Vinnie (presenter). (2012, May 21). Sarah & Vinnie [Radio series episode]. San Francisco, U.S.A.:
CBS Local.
Tuesday, 22 May 2012
Week 8: News Ethics
 |
| Taken by Kevin Carter, 1993. |
This week we talked extensively in our tutorials about the image above. This photo was taken by Kevin Carter in 1993 and he won the Pulitzer prize for it in 1994. There was much backlash and uproar after the photo was published and this unfortunately played a contributing role in Kevin Carter's subsequent suicide.
Whilst there was much controversy surrounding the photo and Kevin Carter's ethics in the taking of the photo, I think it is very unfortunate that this happened. Many many people would have reacted without knowing the full story. Even when I was talking about this photo with a few friends at dinner (by total coincidence) prior to starting JOUR1111, my friends expressed their disgust at him not having helped the child... They were clearly unaware that he was under strict instructions to leave the child alone. Thus, it is obvious how easily people can be misinformed and how dangerous misleading information can be...
Ethics is obvious a very important yet vague aspect of Journalism. I think that ethics are often very subjective. We looked at advertising primarily in the lecture because, as the lecturer stated, the regulations and principles of advertising are applicable to journalism and PR. Many of the images that we looked at in the lecture were quite tacky or 'in bad taste', but I didn't think many were unethical. However, even though it could be argued that they were 'in bad taste' I thought that the tackiness may have actually added to the effectiveness of the advertisement. For example, the image below which is a quit smoking campaign:
I think the 'naughty' aspect of the billboard would actually help people to remember the message and therefore do it's job more effectively.
We then moved onto Australia's "Where the bloody hell are you?" tourism campaign. While I don't think it was unethical, I agree that it was perhaps in poor taste. However, whilst researching for a tourism subject I am taking at the moment, I found that despite it being in poor enough taste to be banned from British television, it was still watched by over 100,000 people in the UK online before it was released on television. So, bad taste or not, it was still rather successful and this is, perhaps, attributed to the controversial nature of the ad.
In conclusion, I believe that risque things are sometimes a good way to grab the readers' attention but I also think that if journalists find themselves aiming for the 'shock factor' then perhaps they need to review their content to see if it is worthy of the attention they seek without the sensationalism. If it isn't, then they need to find better stories.
Thursday, 26 April 2012
Factual Storytelling Exercise
Click on the link below to listen to my factual story:
Information given in the
recording was found from these sources:
1) FAQS. (n.d.). Preeclampsia
Foundation. Retrieved April 26, 2012, from
http://www.preeclampsia.org/health-information/faq
2) Pipkin, F. B. (2001). Risk
Factors for Preeclampsia. The New England Journal of Medicine, 344,
925-926.
Thursday, 19 April 2012
Week 7: Public Media
"The difference between commercial broadcasting and public broadcasting is the difference between consumers and citizens." Nigel Milan.
This is the quote that opened our 8th week of JOUR1111 classes. Evidently, after looking at commercial media last week in class, the natural progression was to public media.
Last week we learnt that commercial media is profit-driven media production and fails or succeeds on business success.
Public media is a completely different ball game. One definition of public media is:
"In general, a media whose mission is to serve or engage a public... Increasingly the term "public media" is less associated with taxpayer supported media; it may be for profit as long as its ultimate aim is to serve the public and not to turn a profit." WGBH Educational Foundation Conference.
This is a very suitable and clear definition and I've included it because it is relevant and modern.
As I said in my last post-lecture blog, I think there is a place in the landscape of Australian media for both commercial and public media. Commercial media may be profit driven but that means that it must attract a large amount of viewers to be successful, public media is not profit driven and thus has different goals for the media it produces.
Public media must have 'public value', which makes it an important form of media for the public.
Public value', according to the BBC, is defined as:
1. Embedding a public service ethos
2. Value for license fee money
3. 'Weighing public value against market value'
4. Public consultation
This public value ensures that public media is conveying information that means something or should mean something to the public. It also means the public has a say in what they view which is an important feature of public media (although public consultation is likely not limited to just public media).
Finally, I really appreciated the advantages and disadvantages that were raised towards the end of the lecture because I hadn't considered all of them before.
Advantages for public media included:
- serious
- broadcast style
- importance over interest
- considered (not quick or unchecked)
Thus, when watching public media we know that they are giving us information that is important and considered relevant to society at that point in time. They're not going to be talking about who punched the paparazzi or which 'celeb' is getting a face-lift. Also, their information is thoroughly checked before it is published/broadcasted and most of the time this means the information is more accurate and reliable. Additionally, public media could also be said to have more connections through government sponsors and thus can often access information that commercial media cannot.
The disadvantages of public media were listed as:
- boring
- elitist
- of limited interest
- poorly presented
- out of touch
The other side of having a serious, broadcasting style is that it can be considered boring. Personally, I often get bored when watching public media. Also, although I know the information being discussed is of public interest, it often doesn't interest me. The 'out of touch' comment is interesting to me. I can see how this could be argued since the information that is presented is said to be due to importance rather than interest but I think this means that the information (whilst of limited interest to certain individuals) is not out of touch. Rather it is in touch with what is relevant to Australian audiences at the time but they're simply not interested in those particular topics or they want more flashy stories to read about.
It may be hard for public media to stay true to it's traditional form since now commercial media is also producing news, but I think it's important that it tries to. Otherwise we will not have enough variety in our media which is always important.
Finally, the last point I'd like to discuss is the effectiveness of public media being a government watchdog. The slide read "There is a tension between being a watchdog of the government while being allocated funds by the government. It has to 'bite the hand that feeds it'."
This point is of upmost importance. It's hard to imagine that public media can be totally unbiased when it is receiving financial support from the government. Public media is considered to be a fair, reliable source of uncensored (within reason) media but it's hard to believe that it can be totally impartial when it is discussing it's sponsors.
I learnt a lot from this lecture because it opened my eyes to the 'behind the scenes' of public media and made me realize that public media has is drawbacks too.
This is the quote that opened our 8th week of JOUR1111 classes. Evidently, after looking at commercial media last week in class, the natural progression was to public media.
Last week we learnt that commercial media is profit-driven media production and fails or succeeds on business success.
Public media is a completely different ball game. One definition of public media is:
"In general, a media whose mission is to serve or engage a public... Increasingly the term "public media" is less associated with taxpayer supported media; it may be for profit as long as its ultimate aim is to serve the public and not to turn a profit." WGBH Educational Foundation Conference.
This is a very suitable and clear definition and I've included it because it is relevant and modern.
As I said in my last post-lecture blog, I think there is a place in the landscape of Australian media for both commercial and public media. Commercial media may be profit driven but that means that it must attract a large amount of viewers to be successful, public media is not profit driven and thus has different goals for the media it produces.
Public media must have 'public value', which makes it an important form of media for the public.
Public value', according to the BBC, is defined as:
1. Embedding a public service ethos
2. Value for license fee money
3. 'Weighing public value against market value'
4. Public consultation
This public value ensures that public media is conveying information that means something or should mean something to the public. It also means the public has a say in what they view which is an important feature of public media (although public consultation is likely not limited to just public media).
Finally, I really appreciated the advantages and disadvantages that were raised towards the end of the lecture because I hadn't considered all of them before.
Advantages for public media included:
- serious
- broadcast style
- importance over interest
- considered (not quick or unchecked)
Thus, when watching public media we know that they are giving us information that is important and considered relevant to society at that point in time. They're not going to be talking about who punched the paparazzi or which 'celeb' is getting a face-lift. Also, their information is thoroughly checked before it is published/broadcasted and most of the time this means the information is more accurate and reliable. Additionally, public media could also be said to have more connections through government sponsors and thus can often access information that commercial media cannot.
The disadvantages of public media were listed as:
- boring
- elitist
- of limited interest
- poorly presented
- out of touch
The other side of having a serious, broadcasting style is that it can be considered boring. Personally, I often get bored when watching public media. Also, although I know the information being discussed is of public interest, it often doesn't interest me. The 'out of touch' comment is interesting to me. I can see how this could be argued since the information that is presented is said to be due to importance rather than interest but I think this means that the information (whilst of limited interest to certain individuals) is not out of touch. Rather it is in touch with what is relevant to Australian audiences at the time but they're simply not interested in those particular topics or they want more flashy stories to read about.
It may be hard for public media to stay true to it's traditional form since now commercial media is also producing news, but I think it's important that it tries to. Otherwise we will not have enough variety in our media which is always important.
Finally, the last point I'd like to discuss is the effectiveness of public media being a government watchdog. The slide read "There is a tension between being a watchdog of the government while being allocated funds by the government. It has to 'bite the hand that feeds it'."
This point is of upmost importance. It's hard to imagine that public media can be totally unbiased when it is receiving financial support from the government. Public media is considered to be a fair, reliable source of uncensored (within reason) media but it's hard to believe that it can be totally impartial when it is discussing it's sponsors.
I learnt a lot from this lecture because it opened my eyes to the 'behind the scenes' of public media and made me realize that public media has is drawbacks too.
Tuesday, 17 April 2012
How Much is Too Much? The Case of Wikileaks
WikiLeaks has seemingly dropped off the radar compared to just a short while ago (around the end of 2010/beginning of 2011) when the media couldn't go a day without an update about WikiLeaks or it's founder Julian Assange.
WikiLeaks was highly controversial from the moment it went public. Personally, I thought that it was very dangerous and somewhat foolish even revealing so much private government information and communications to the public. In Australia, we enjoy the right of the "five fundamental freedoms" and we have access to a lot of information from our government that citizens of other nations do not. However, it is my personal belief that there are some things that should be kept within the government for our own safety/protection. Our government is already quite transparent (although I know people will argue against me on that point), but after having lived in a communist nation, I know this to be true comparatively.
It is definitely true that if you do something wrong, you must be held accountable for your actions - and potentially WikiLeaks could be used as a responsible watchdog. But it is also true that sometimes confidential information is confidential for a reason.
No matter what your view is on the subject (whether you support things like WikiLeaks or not) knowing how much to disclose is something for all journalists to consider when they write and publish stories of a highly revealing, sensitive and uncensored nature.
WikiLeaks was highly controversial from the moment it went public. Personally, I thought that it was very dangerous and somewhat foolish even revealing so much private government information and communications to the public. In Australia, we enjoy the right of the "five fundamental freedoms" and we have access to a lot of information from our government that citizens of other nations do not. However, it is my personal belief that there are some things that should be kept within the government for our own safety/protection. Our government is already quite transparent (although I know people will argue against me on that point), but after having lived in a communist nation, I know this to be true comparatively.
It is definitely true that if you do something wrong, you must be held accountable for your actions - and potentially WikiLeaks could be used as a responsible watchdog. But it is also true that sometimes confidential information is confidential for a reason.
No matter what your view is on the subject (whether you support things like WikiLeaks or not) knowing how much to disclose is something for all journalists to consider when they write and publish stories of a highly revealing, sensitive and uncensored nature.
Saturday, 14 April 2012
So Wonderful!
Just wanted to share this gem! Glasbergen definitely summed up today's style of communication and relationships.
Current Thoughts...
I have been thinking long and hard about how to present my factual story - it's much more difficult than I thought!
I finally found my story. I knew I wanted something that was very interesting and emotional at the same time. Both my father and grandmother almost died during my dad's birth due to a condition that is very preventable nowadays. When I was discussing the project with my family, my dad gave me the idea and I'm glad that I chose it. Having a great story to tell has made me much more motivated to do the best I can possibly do, but as a result, this assignment is all I can think about. Eeek!
After listening to the sound lecture, I'm really interested in using a voice recording to present my story. The sound lecture gave me some really great ideas about how to be personal and curious and educational. I listen to quite a bit of radio from time to time and I think it's a great way to tell a story but I wouldn't know whether to do it in an interview style or just have the person who's story it is tell the story or tell the story myself. It's tricky to decide which would be the most appropriate format.
I gave some thought to presenting it in a photo gallery accompanied by voice recordings but there are not enough photos from that time to present it properly. We are also able to do a video recording but since my father lives in a different country, I wouldn't be able to film it myself, so that is no longer an option.
I would love to be able to sound since I haven't worked much with sound in the past - I've mainly focused on text and video based media so I think it would be a great opportunity to try something new. I'm in the brainstorming process right now and I hope to have a plan ASAP :)
In other news, I have also been using my twitter account a bit more so I'm happy with myself for that since it was one of my aims after doing the media usage/production diary. It's actually been a lot of fun and I'm happy with the people who I'm following at the moment - I've got a great mix between obviously my JOUR1111 classmates, comedians, actors, news presenters, news sources, etc. So there's always something interesting to read.
I've also been having a great time over the holidays because I'm finally able to catch up on what's going on around the world. I love having the time to read more than one news story a day.
One story that caught my eye was the story about how many miners are quitting their jobs due to the brutal conditions they face whilst working. The link to the story was "Miners: We fly in, we fly out... We quit." I think since mining is becoming such a huge industry in Australia at the moment, we really need to be taking care of our miners and making sure their mental health is well looked after. According to the story, written by Anthony Deceglie, six figure salaries are not enough to stop one in three miners from quitting within a year. Problems such as binge drinking and drug usage have also been affecting workers at the mines. I think this statistic is very worrying. I have friends who are doing mining in university and whilst they may be doing more of the office work they are still on site and thus susceptible to these problems also. I hope the mining companies find a way to balance work and play for these miners in a healthy manner. I think it's good for the public to have awareness about this issue because then the mining companies will be questioned and forced to review the situation and find a solution.
Read more of the story here: http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/fly-in-fly-out-workers-quitting-hard-life/story-e6frg12c-1226326651683
I finally found my story. I knew I wanted something that was very interesting and emotional at the same time. Both my father and grandmother almost died during my dad's birth due to a condition that is very preventable nowadays. When I was discussing the project with my family, my dad gave me the idea and I'm glad that I chose it. Having a great story to tell has made me much more motivated to do the best I can possibly do, but as a result, this assignment is all I can think about. Eeek!
After listening to the sound lecture, I'm really interested in using a voice recording to present my story. The sound lecture gave me some really great ideas about how to be personal and curious and educational. I listen to quite a bit of radio from time to time and I think it's a great way to tell a story but I wouldn't know whether to do it in an interview style or just have the person who's story it is tell the story or tell the story myself. It's tricky to decide which would be the most appropriate format.
I gave some thought to presenting it in a photo gallery accompanied by voice recordings but there are not enough photos from that time to present it properly. We are also able to do a video recording but since my father lives in a different country, I wouldn't be able to film it myself, so that is no longer an option.
I would love to be able to sound since I haven't worked much with sound in the past - I've mainly focused on text and video based media so I think it would be a great opportunity to try something new. I'm in the brainstorming process right now and I hope to have a plan ASAP :)
In other news, I have also been using my twitter account a bit more so I'm happy with myself for that since it was one of my aims after doing the media usage/production diary. It's actually been a lot of fun and I'm happy with the people who I'm following at the moment - I've got a great mix between obviously my JOUR1111 classmates, comedians, actors, news presenters, news sources, etc. So there's always something interesting to read.
I've also been having a great time over the holidays because I'm finally able to catch up on what's going on around the world. I love having the time to read more than one news story a day.
One story that caught my eye was the story about how many miners are quitting their jobs due to the brutal conditions they face whilst working. The link to the story was "Miners: We fly in, we fly out... We quit." I think since mining is becoming such a huge industry in Australia at the moment, we really need to be taking care of our miners and making sure their mental health is well looked after. According to the story, written by Anthony Deceglie, six figure salaries are not enough to stop one in three miners from quitting within a year. Problems such as binge drinking and drug usage have also been affecting workers at the mines. I think this statistic is very worrying. I have friends who are doing mining in university and whilst they may be doing more of the office work they are still on site and thus susceptible to these problems also. I hope the mining companies find a way to balance work and play for these miners in a healthy manner. I think it's good for the public to have awareness about this issue because then the mining companies will be questioned and forced to review the situation and find a solution.
Read more of the story here: http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/fly-in-fly-out-workers-quitting-hard-life/story-e6frg12c-1226326651683
Week 6: Commercial Media
From what I learnt this week, I think
there is a need for both commercial and public media. The big question we
looked at was "Can commercial media deliver on both commercial (profit)
and social ('public trust') functions? (Or is it really just about the might
$$$?)"
Since we have controls in place such as:
formal state requirements, legal prescription and state oversight, I think it
is possible for commercial media to deliver on both commercial and social
functions. Of course, the motivation is primarily for profit but there are many
great commercial media sources.
We also learnt about the future of
commercial media. While I think trying to put paywalls is a questionable move,
I definitely agree with greater competition, better quality and moving existing
customers to digital.
Social responsibility of The Media in a
Democracy:
1. a truthful, comprehensive, and
intelligent
account of the day’s events in a context
which
gives them meaning;
2. a forum for the exchange of comment
and
criticism;
3. the projection of a representative
picture of the
constituent groups in the society;
4. the presentation and clarification of
the goals
and values of the society;
5. full access to the day’s
intelligence.
(Hutchins Commission 1947)
I was very interested by the Hutchins Commission
because although it was written a long time ago it still is very applicable and
relevant to the producers of today's media. I think as budding journalists we
all have a responsibility to pay attention to the ethics behind the media we
produce and make sure that we are fulfilling the responsibilities of the media
in a democracy.
Saturday, 7 April 2012
Week 5: Sound Lecture
This week's sound lecture touched upon many aspects of radio and media.
Richard Fidler really impressed me when he said that he thought that the most important thing was the he was fully interested in what he and his guest were talking about, which I really liked :) It's great to hear from someone who is passionate about his work.
Another thing I appreciated that he said was that he likes to let the people talk and enable them to feel comfortable enough to keep going by not interrupting too much. I think more radio presenters could learn from him in this regard.
A few key points from both interviews I got were:
- If you work with media, it helps to be versatile
- Good TV does not translate to good radio
- TV is a high impact media
- The key to a good interview is to create a safe and comfortable environment for your guest
- Different styles of interviewing work with different guests - e.g. a TV presenter may need to be more normal so crack a few jokes, or if you want someone to talk freely don't fire questions at them
- Show your guest respect by listening to them
- Silence in radio is very powerful, it is both truthful and revealing
- Keep asking questions + reading the paper
- Think about what the audience wants/needs not what you want to talk about
- Radio is the 'theatre of the mind'
- Be human and go for the human experience
- Don't ask what they ask you not to ask
- Don't give up even if you're not naturally talented
Steve Austin was also a very interesting person. I liked most what he said about not giving up on something just because you're not naturally talented at it. Since I am also a person who is not naturally talented at many things but is willing to work at them, I was relieved to hear someone who has succeeded due to hard work and not due to natural abilities.
I really enjoyed the sound lecture. It was a great example of how you can get a look into someone's life without even seeing them. Everything they both said about getting to know the person despite only hearing them talk really hit home because after I finished listening to the two interviews I felt like I had been in the conversation as well, it was very well done. It has also given me ideas about our upcoming factual storytelling exercise assignment. Perhaps I should follow the wise words of my tutor (Ms. Carmel Rooney), who said that we should use this assignment to broaden our experience with different forms of media, and give a sound piece a go? It's a medium that I would like to become more experienced with and this would be a good opportunity to try.
It's definitely something for me to ponder. We shall see...
Richard Fidler really impressed me when he said that he thought that the most important thing was the he was fully interested in what he and his guest were talking about, which I really liked :) It's great to hear from someone who is passionate about his work.
Another thing I appreciated that he said was that he likes to let the people talk and enable them to feel comfortable enough to keep going by not interrupting too much. I think more radio presenters could learn from him in this regard.
A few key points from both interviews I got were:
- If you work with media, it helps to be versatile
- Good TV does not translate to good radio
- TV is a high impact media
- The key to a good interview is to create a safe and comfortable environment for your guest
- Different styles of interviewing work with different guests - e.g. a TV presenter may need to be more normal so crack a few jokes, or if you want someone to talk freely don't fire questions at them
- Show your guest respect by listening to them
- Silence in radio is very powerful, it is both truthful and revealing
- Keep asking questions + reading the paper
- Think about what the audience wants/needs not what you want to talk about
- Radio is the 'theatre of the mind'
- Be human and go for the human experience
- Don't ask what they ask you not to ask
- Don't give up even if you're not naturally talented
Steve Austin was also a very interesting person. I liked most what he said about not giving up on something just because you're not naturally talented at it. Since I am also a person who is not naturally talented at many things but is willing to work at them, I was relieved to hear someone who has succeeded due to hard work and not due to natural abilities.
I really enjoyed the sound lecture. It was a great example of how you can get a look into someone's life without even seeing them. Everything they both said about getting to know the person despite only hearing them talk really hit home because after I finished listening to the two interviews I felt like I had been in the conversation as well, it was very well done. It has also given me ideas about our upcoming factual storytelling exercise assignment. Perhaps I should follow the wise words of my tutor (Ms. Carmel Rooney), who said that we should use this assignment to broaden our experience with different forms of media, and give a sound piece a go? It's a medium that I would like to become more experienced with and this would be a good opportunity to try.
It's definitely something for me to ponder. We shall see...
Thursday, 29 March 2012
Personal Media Use and Production Diary
Personal Media Use and Production Diary
Figure 1. Media Use and Production Log
What: Skype
When: Almost Everyday (an
average of 28 minutes per day).
Why: Due to my parents living
overseas, I use Skype to converse with them since it is much cheaper than
calling. Also, about 95% of my high school friends live spread out all over the
world so it is a good medium for keeping in contact (again, cheaper than
texting/calling internationally). Many international students would likely
reflect this behaviour.
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: About
¼ (111 of 436) of the JOUR1111 responded to using Skype when online, that is
not a huge percentage but is still important. It shows that a lot of domestic
students are also using Skype whilst online since this figure (111 people) is
higher than the amount of international students in the course (27 people). Could
this mean Skype has replaced older sources of chat/messenger programs? I spend
a lot of time on Skype per day and it has completely replaced any other forms
of chat sites that I used to use in the past. In terms of my relationship to
Journalism and Communication, this shows that Skype is one of my main mediums
that I use to communicate (refer to figure 2).
What: Facebook
When: Far too much (an average of
69.5 minutes per day).
Why: It is strange to think that just a few months ago, when I lived
in China (and Facebook was blocked) I had deactivated my account to focus on
grade 12 and then only used it sporadically when I reactivated it. That was
because I needed a VPN to access it and that was troublesome. A lot of the time
I spend on Facebook I attribute to the fact that I live in college. We have a
page on Facebook and it is the easiest way to keep up to date with the events
and general happenings at college.
I
also believe that keeping up with my friends overseas is much easier with Facebook
because I can see their status updates and all their pictures. It’s a great way
to keep in contact. Rather than having to write an email and find their email
address and send it, I can write on many peoples’ “walls” in a matter of
minutes. Typing in their name and writing on their wall a simple “hey, how’s it
going” is very quick. I believe that when sending emails, you’re expected to
write more than a few words but on Facebook (and this may be attributed to
having many young users) just a few of words is acceptable.
Finally,
another reason that dictates my Facebook usage is my Iphone. With my plan, I have
unlimited Facebook usage. It is so easy to just click on when I’m walking
around town or on a bus/train and bored. It is a main contributor to how much I
use Facebook.
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: It
would appear that many of the JOUR1111 students spend most of their online
internet usage on Facebook. Whilst we may have a few different reasons for this,
I believe we are similar in terms of using it to keep in contact with friends. I
certainly use Facebook extensively to communicate with people across the world, it is one of my primary forms of media that I use for communication purposes (refer to figure 2).
This shows a trend that Facebook has become a main source of communication amongst
people all over the world, which is significant to Journalism and Communication
students.
Figure 2. Primary Forms of Media Used for Communication Purposes
What: Personal Blog
When: Sporadically (an average
of 13.5 minutes per day).
Why: I love having a blog. I love reading blogs and
developing my own. It is important to note that my personal blog is one of my
only sources of media production (refer to figure 3). I don’t spend too much time on it because,
put simply, I don’t have much time but I really enjoy it. It is a medium that I
use to express my feelings and thoughts primarily through photos and images.
Figure 3. Media Usage vs. Media Production Comparison
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: All
my close friends in high school had a Tumblr blog but I notice that the majority
of JOUR1111 students didn’t have a blog prior to starting the course. This
could be attributed to the fact that the majority of JOUR1111 students are
domestic and perhaps having a personal blog is more common to international
students but the survey doesn’t show this information. I spend approximately an hour per post
on my blog for class because I find it very enjoyable and after having my own
personal blog, I am interested in posting things relating to class that I find
on the Internet or in newspapers.
What: iPhone
When: Regularly throughout the
day (an average of 39 minutes per day).
Why: I use my iPhone to make calls, text, surf
Facebook and to play games such as “Draw Something”.
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: It
surprised me that 22.7% of JOUR1111 students don’t have a smart phone since it
appears that everybody has an internet-enabled smart phone lately. This is a
very new phenomenon. When I visited Australia just two years ago, my best
friend had one of the earlier models of smartphones and it was very unusual, but now it is
very common. I believe this has majorly affected the way people communicate. The touch screen of the iPhone and the conversational chat style in which text messages are presented means that I text much more now than I did before. I look
online at maps for everything on my phone whilst on the move rather than
searching for directions before leaving the house, and I am on Facebook a lot
more. Any media source that doesn’t have an application for smart phone usage
is now considered ‘behind the times’. It’s important for us, as journalism and
communication students, to be conscious of the way people are accessing and
using media. My relationship to communication has definitely changed since
having a smartphone, I text much more often, I use applications to text
overseas for free (if there is an internet connection available) and I use
Facebook much more often. I have become much more dependent on my phone than I
have ever been before.
What: TV (and Playstation)
When: Rarely throughout the week
- mainly at mealtimes (an average of 7.5 minutes per day).
Why: My access to TV is limited
due to the fact that I don’t own one. This would be different to students that
live at home. I live at a residential college on campus and I don’t have a TV
in my room. The TV in the cafeteria is on at mealtimes and I mainly just gaze
over in the morning to see some of the headlines and at dinner times to shout
at the people on “Deal or No Deal”, but apart from the odd Barclays English
Premier League soccer match here and there I don’t make a habit of watching TV.
I also play Fifa on Playstation from time to time as a breather from University
work but, again, that’s quite rare.
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: Most
JOUR1111 students watch 1 to 2 hours of TV a day so there is a large difference
between myself and my classmates. In relation to Journalism and Communication
studies, this would be pertinent knowledge for news companies to evaluate how
to best reach their audiences. For example: students that live in colleges probably
get most of our news from online sources or print media whereas students that
live at home may be more accessible via TV broadcasting. In terms of my
relationship to Journalism and Communication, TV does not play a big role.
What: Radio
When: Periodically (an average
of 14.5 minutes per day).
Why: I listen to the radio when
I get sick of my own music and I listen to it on my computer predominantly.
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: 358
JOUR1111 students responded to listening
to the radio in the car. This differs to my own answer - online streaming at
home. People that listen to the radio online can tune in at more varied times throughout
the day but due to work hours there are more definite patterns for people who
listen to the radio in the car. The most popular times would presumably be
during peak hour (the time when most people are in the car, and for longer
periods of time). This is an important trend for journalists and radio presenters
to consider because they should put the most popular segments during this time
period to attract the most listeners. Whilst it may not affect listeners who
tune in online, you will most likely reach a large number of people who listen to
the radio while driving (which, according to the JOUR1111 survey, is the
majority).
What: Twitter
When: Very rarely (an average of
3.7 minutes per day).
Why: The only reason I use Twitter is for class work. I skim through the tweets from sources like
CNN and The Courier Mail and perhaps ‘re-tweet’ things but I don’t have enough
time to invest in exploring the full capabilities of twitter.
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: The
majority of the class, including myself, did not have a twitter account prior
to starting JOUR1111. Although I think it’s a great social medium and I
completely understand the hype surrounding twitter, I would probably use it
more if I had downloaded the iPhone twitter application. In future, I would
like to further explore the varied ways people use twitter and how I can use
Twitter more effectively.
What: Music
When: I listen to music quite
often on my iPhone whilst walking to class or on my computer at home (an
average of 50 minutes per day).
Why: I like having something to
listen to whilst walking and I also listen to music whenever I need a break
from University assignments.
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: The
majority of JOUR1111 students (385) responded that they listen to music mostly
on their smartphone but listening on the computer came in a close second (320
students), so this accurately reflects my behaviour as well.
What: General Computer Use
When: ALL THE TIME (an average
of 165 minutes per day)!
Why: I use my computer all the
time (refer to figure 4). Instead of watching the news on TV, I read it online because I don’t have
a TV. Instead of having a family dinner, I talk to my parents on Skype because
they live overseas. I also use Skype and other chat sites to converse with my
high school friends who live scattered around the world. I use my computer to
go on Facebook, to listen to the radio, to research for University assessments,
to go on my blog, etc. It is no secret that people nowadays spend an incredible
amount of time on their computers. Journalists picked up on this a long time
ago and that’s why I can always get the news by a few clicks of my mouse. This
is a prime example of journalism evolving to keep up with the changes in
peoples’ habits. No longer do people have to watch the news or buy a paper to
get the headlines. Some claim that print media is dead and this is arguable but
what is not debatable is the real need to stay ahead of the times by having a
website where people can read the news, or having a twitter account to ‘tweet’
headlines, etc. The world is an ever-changing place and every communication company
has the opportunity to sink or swim regarding effective online accessibility.
Figure 4. Graph Depicting General Computer Use Over 10 Days
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: In
10 days I spent an incredible 1650 minutes on my computer. That’s 2.75 hours per
day! Most of this time involved using the internet. The survey revealed that most respondents (29.6% of JOUR1111 students) spent about 2-3 hours on the Internet each day, which is
the category I fit into. This was followed by 3-4 hours with 23.4% of votes and
finally 2-3 hours per day in a close third with 22.5%. This is an astonishing change
from when I was young. I had no idea what a computer was until I was about 7
years old. I remember seeing my mum work on one for her Masters Degree when I
was about 6 and I had no idea what that box on the desk was capable of. Now
it’s an integral part of each day’s routine for many others and myself. I am
glad I was alive during the times that computers became so popular. The younger
generations don’t know what it’s like not to have the whole world at your
fingertips. As a student studying Journalism and Communications, I feel at an
advantage because I have witnessed such monumental changes in the way we
interact via media and how people/industries successfully adjusted and adapted
to these changes in media production and consumption.
What: Online News
When: At irregular intervals (an
average of 12.3 minutes per day).
Why: I used to watch the news
on TV a lot but after moving to college and not having a personal TV that has
changed. I now get most of my news online but I don’t have as much time as I
did to read through the articles. Now I tend to skim through but when I have
time I like to get up to date with the happenings around the world.
Compared to the JOUR1111 survey
results: Most
students get their news from TV news channels but the numbers for online news
sites and newspapers were quite similar, so there is no clear preferred news
source. I think this is reflective of our age group. Most of the students were
born into a time when our parents read the newspaper often, where we grew up
watching the news at night on TV with our family and finally, nowadays, where
we can get the news headlines for ourselves on the Internet. With all the
changes that have taken place over the last few years in relation to news
source developments, I’m not surprised there are still many varied ways in
which the JOUR1111 students get their news.
Conclusion:
From
my perspective, much of my media usage/production reflects that of an
international student. I appear to use Skype much more than a domestic student.
I also have a personal blog, which was quite common amongst my friends in high
school in China but that appears to be quite uncommon here. I believe my age
also affects my media usage especially in reference to how much I use my
computer even for things that are available elsewhere such as the news and
radio shows (refer to figure 5).
Figure 5. Percentage View of General Media Usage
Evidently
the amount of media usage and production varies greatly amongst different
people and we all use different social mediums for various reasons.
Being
able to analyse our own media usage and production is very important as
Journalism and Communication Students. Why? It enables us to recognize patterns
and trends amongst various forms of media. This could be helpful if we were
aiming to spread information or a particular story. It is also critical to be
aware of why people use certain forms of media and how because we can assess
the impact and influence of various media types on a range of people.
From this media use diary I have learnt a lot about my own media usage and
production and I have been led to question why I spend so much time on certain
forms of media and neglect others. I have also been able to recognize patterns
and form conclusions on why I believe this to be the case. Looking at my
production vs. usage, I am inspired to attempt to produce more media in the
future rather than just being another user. In the future, I will aim to
investigate mediums in which I can try to produce more media, more often. As a
journalism and communication student, I think this is important for my personal
growth and knowledge in the subject. I think this exercise has been beneficial
because I hadn’t given much thought to my media usage and production before and
I think I will pay more attention in the future which is advantageous for a
Journalism and Communication student like myself.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)