Headlines

I really liked the 'Best Headlines of the Year' list. I mean I was reading through them and laughing but I know that it is easy to produce a headline like those. It's easy to simply read the headline you wrote a different way than someone else, or in a different context. Syntax is so essential in headlines. We try to write in the active voice and we try to write succinctly, yet still sometimes it just comes out all wrong. The list reaffirmed my belief that everyone should read their headline out loud and in front of different audiences before running it.
As far as the Lisa Nowark story, I'm a little torn. Obviously tabloids can make great jest at this petty story. They can write the clever headlines. However, I don't think the NYTimes should do such a thing. A credible, mainstream news outlet must take the story as it is: ridiculous, possibly pathetic but still newsworthy as a serious crime was involved. Though I don't think the NYTimes or an outlet of similar status should put an overemphasis on the story, I think it still would need to cover it professionally at least once.
I was interested in the Illinois media headlines about Blagovich's scandal. Were they so critical or harsh because the media outlets themselves were fooled and embarrassed by their own governor and had the right to be upset? I sometimes feel that when the story is closer to home you need to be more cautious but apparently these newspapers did not feel the need to hold back. I think it depends on the situation and Blagovich obviously let a lot of people down inexcusably.
I think that is an important lesson to be learned and applied to our news publication. Look at each situation and how it will affect the people at home and then write the headline accordingly. Seems easy enough but in some cases it might make all the difference.

Journalism Ethics

My section covered journalists and politics. Basically, they are not to noticeable mix. I agree that journalists shouldn't openly promote a politician, or special interest group because it interferes with their objectivity, or their perceived objectivity. Journalists can't give money to campaigns or go out marching in rallies because readers would naturally not believe anything those journalists had to say about that particular issue. In my publication I would make it known that the writers needed to keep their ties to themselves and not let it interfere with their work. Also, same goes with being members of community groups. Writers can go to church or be apart of alumni groups but other groups like city boards or commissions are off limits. Journalists' relationships with advertisers or public relations practitioners need to be cordial. I do not want my writers to completely turn up their noses at advertisers or PR practitioners because we are all just trying to do our job and if we give respect, they will return it. Finally, no one can use the paper to get ahead personally, and I think that goes to say for any company. Overall, after reading this section it is poignantly clear that when you are a journalist, you are a journalist first before everything else. Better get used to it.

Be Ethical

Reading over the normal code of ethics I stumbled over one important piece that always bothers me when it comes to online publications and interactivity with the readers. Accountability. I know that it was addressed in the Poynter article that sometimes it is necessary to the story for people to not disclose their names in a story/blog, but it makes me extremely nervous. I think that any respectable blog or forum would want the readers to identify themselves so that everyone is accountable for their own words, actions and, horribly, possible libel. Moving on to the digital and audio editing, I think it's a really good idea that different publications are coming up with their own code for visuals. I think it's absolutely true that visuals can send a very powerful message to the reader and the publication needs to make sure that the message they're sending is accurate with what really happened. I thought it was classy that Texarkana Gazette will not show dead or injured bodies, and that Sioux Falls will not allow their pictures to be used in advertising.
I think overall this collection of readings reminds us all that ethical behavior should always be foremost on our mind. We need to be making judgment calls daily to ensure that we are neither spin doctors nor "sensationalizers." In our news publication I think we should have a code of ethics for visual and audio, making sure that no one abuses the power of software like Photoshop. If we constantly consider whether what we're doing is right or necessary I think we could have a fair publication.

Designing

First off, after being in class Friday before break and trying to make a nice newspaper layout, I have such appreciation for the Chicago Tribune, Hartford Courant and Oklahoman's new designs. I think it's great that they are trying to move with the times and update their paper, just as any firm would do with their products as time goes on. Newspapers today especially need to be innovative, enterprising and branching out of the traditional boundaries. I also think it was great that the Chicago Tribune and Oklahoman held focus groups to see if the readers would like their new design. The narrower paper definitely is a big change and I think making that change without seeing how readers felt would have been a potentially huge mistake. I also loved how the Oklahoman is using color as a navigational tool. I think most people can attest that newspapers can get a little dry and dreary to look at when it's all grey with only three colors. The Oklahoman's vibrant colors are awesome, though it can't be cheap. I'd love to use a lot of color and an unique design for our news publication, especially because I think it will resonate well with our young target audience.
Quinn's article about visual journalists is really interesting and it makes me really wish I knew more about design and layout. I actually am considering taking the AdCopy and Design class through my IMC minor and after reading these few articles, I think I might just because of the opportunity I may be giving myself in the future. I think it makes perfect sense that visual journalists- combining good content and research with text, graphics and more- are going to be highly desirable in the upcoming years. People have always responded well to visuals while hearing/reading a story.
I thought the debunked design myths were interesting. I didn't even know a lot of them- like what is reverse type exactly. I really would like to use a different font and rag right alignment for our news publication. Again I think for our target audience it will be good to have easy-to- read text.

More on Reading

Well, I found Peter Osnos article interesting- how he compared the future of journalism with the future of the economy. Ideologically and practically, journalism needs to be reevaluated. I think he definitely had a point by reminding the public that the news content that they read online or in the newspapers is not free. It didn't magically appear in print, and will not magically still remain published without the hardworking individuals who do this for a living. I don't think any of us would agree to relying solely on citizen journalists and the blogosphere for our country's news.
Therefore, we must put a price on the content. We pay for everything else in the world, why wouldn't we pay for news that makes it online. He also mentioned that nonprofit organizations will eventually support the news. I find this hopeful, but a little skeptical as to if it can actually happen.
Folkenflik's discussion on the nonprofit business model of news is interesting, yet again, is it truly reliable? I suppose if the public is finally convinced that the content is a commodity that they won't be able to find elsewhere, then they'll be more likely to contribute money. However, the news can be found everywhere as of right now. It would have to be a wide industry movement, coupled with putting a price on content that reaches the Internet. Is it possible?
Looking over these articles makes me think that my publication's writers probably will get small salaries, especially if we go to a nonprofit business model. It also makes me realize the importance of gaining credibility, respect and a following in the local area that we are reaching. It does make me sad though because it sounds way more like marketing to a crowd, when journalism's products used to be the one thing free of commercial gain.

Thoughts

I was a little hesitant while reading Cohn's article because although I think it is important to give the people what they want instead of trying to force news down their throat, if you pitch ideas right to the people will you end up having all the same stories? I've talked about cognitive dissonance before but I believe this could have a tendency to occur if people were given full editorial freedom in picking stories. However, I did like his idea of using an iterative process, using the feedback from one stage to inform the next step of the process. I definitely would use this in planning and developing my online publication. Korr and Kennedy discussed mostly the value of having links to important, related or contextual information and making it easily available on one's website. I definitely agree with this practice as people do want to know more about certain subjects, or want the chance to learn more, if only they knew where to turn to. On my publication I would always have a sidebar of related and contextual information because I think it more clearly informs the reader. Gannon made me hopeful in that the old journalistic values will not be lost, and that fairness, accuracy and completeness will win over people in the future. I found it interesting though that he did not include objectivity or credibility- which is a huge issue with online publications, comments, bloggers, etc. Still, Gannon requested that his commenters do write their full names, and I definitely agree with this practice. A little accountability never hurt anyone.

Reflections

My thoughts on this set of readings is that blogs are great, but they're not perfect, especially when they're not used well. As Howe pointed out, bloggers don't want to write on subjects about which they are not passionate. They didn't get a degree in journalism. They don't understand that some journalism is down- right boring. Therefore, outlets need to use bloggers correctly- allow them to write on subjects that interest them, for it creates better pieces. Still, on my news publication, taking after what Steele discusses in his article, I will require bloggers to identify themselves and sources that they use. I want the blogs to be credible sources of information. I would still employ an online communications editor to review blogs and question sketchy posts, but at least bringing some accountability to the table will enforce bloggers to think before they write. Indeed the blogging process has completely changed professional journalists, as Bradshaw writes. Besides for the sports journalist- and I'm assuming they have been passed over by the crowd because sports really isn't that subjective, controversial or hard to cover- almost everyone has had to reassess how they should do their job. I was very surprised by Colonel Tribune. It will be the day when Mr.Ms (?) NYTimes friends me on Facebook and wants me to post interesting story leads that I have heard about throughout the day. Still, I see the benefit of providing this outlet. For one thing, it lets the newspaper reach a much younger, untapped generation, and that is always a good thing. I could see my online publication having an identity on some social network. It really wouldn't hurt any to experience with it, though, the person behind the identity would have to continually check itself to make sure it was upholding the strictest ethics behind journalism.