Media consolidation is an aspect of news today that I feel slips under our radar far too often. We see news on television, hear it on the radio, or read it in newspapers, and take it for granted that these are the stories that we need to hear about. However, what we do not know is that it is very possible that every one of those mediums of news that we sought for information was actually all owned by the same person, with his or her own agenda in mind.
When I think of news, I think of unbiased fact and stories. I think of stories that matter to the people; stories that matter to me. In order to be good citizens and make decisions for our community,
i think it is our right to know exactly what is going on in our local community where we live, as well as world news that may have more significant implications. In addition to this, I think the media keeping the government in check and being the "watchdog" like we discussed in class is also a key job of the media. A lot of what happens in the government, as well as huge corporations that wield great power, happens behind closed doors as they make decisions that will affect the people under them. I want this from our media sources, and I do not want to have to think twice about the stories I hear or read, second-guessing the hidden agenda of the news that is being reported to me.
In class we came up with about five or six of the major news owners in the United States today. With so few presiding over almost all of the media that we have access to, the natural question to ask is, "Are we getting all of the news?". And although media consolidation seems like an unstoppable force, there is still hope for news. Things such as the internet and blogging, along with localized news have been putting up a fight to keep news for the people, and let's just hope it puts up a good fight.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Critiquing a Contempoary News Article: Oil Spill in Texas
"Cleanup under way in 462,000-gallon spill off Texas"
I think that this article is a very good example of how to use the components of a story outlined in Melvin Mencher's Text, "News Reporting and Writing". The article is from CNN's website, a very well known and respected news source in the United States.The story reports on a massive oil spill that occurred in Texas, about one hundred miles away of Houston. Oil spills are certainly a scary event for many reasons. The industry is losing the oil that was spilled, as well as the equipment that broke causing the spill: two barges and a tanker that contained the oil. In addition to this, the environmental aspects of an oil spill are always the first to come to mind. With this being said, I think that this article does a nice job of covering all of the crucial facts of the story in an appropriate way if we are to grade it using Mencher's criteria.
For example, I thought that the way the information was presented in the article was brief and focused. The article only spans for approximately a full page on the internet, and yet it contained all of the necessary information to get the story across. I feel like the information was as accurate as it could be, even though there was a lot of secondhand and thirdhand information in the story. Direct quotes backed up the journalists story as he or she told it. Considering the situation, I think that CNN got the most accurate information available, as it would be extremely fortuitous if a journalist from CNN had been at the right place at the right time to actually see the accident occur. And when I say fortuitous, I am strictly talking about the reporting on the story itself, not the actual accident.
One thing in particular that I think the CNN journalist did especially well was anticipating the questions that readers may have while reading the article, and then supplying the appropriate information to leave the reader satisfied, which is one of the components Mencher keys in on in his text. Personally, as I was reading the article, the natural questions that I was thinking were answered almost immediately after I thought them. For example, I was wondering if there were any injuries, to humans or animals. Shortly after the initial information about the accident was presented, the journalist wrote about the fact that there were no human injuries, and that only one heron was "oiled".
Overall I believe the article was well written, stayed very objective, and gave all of the information necessary to give the people a clear view of this horrible accident in Texas.
I think that this article is a very good example of how to use the components of a story outlined in Melvin Mencher's Text, "News Reporting and Writing". The article is from CNN's website, a very well known and respected news source in the United States.The story reports on a massive oil spill that occurred in Texas, about one hundred miles away of Houston. Oil spills are certainly a scary event for many reasons. The industry is losing the oil that was spilled, as well as the equipment that broke causing the spill: two barges and a tanker that contained the oil. In addition to this, the environmental aspects of an oil spill are always the first to come to mind. With this being said, I think that this article does a nice job of covering all of the crucial facts of the story in an appropriate way if we are to grade it using Mencher's criteria.
For example, I thought that the way the information was presented in the article was brief and focused. The article only spans for approximately a full page on the internet, and yet it contained all of the necessary information to get the story across. I feel like the information was as accurate as it could be, even though there was a lot of secondhand and thirdhand information in the story. Direct quotes backed up the journalists story as he or she told it. Considering the situation, I think that CNN got the most accurate information available, as it would be extremely fortuitous if a journalist from CNN had been at the right place at the right time to actually see the accident occur. And when I say fortuitous, I am strictly talking about the reporting on the story itself, not the actual accident.
One thing in particular that I think the CNN journalist did especially well was anticipating the questions that readers may have while reading the article, and then supplying the appropriate information to leave the reader satisfied, which is one of the components Mencher keys in on in his text. Personally, as I was reading the article, the natural questions that I was thinking were answered almost immediately after I thought them. For example, I was wondering if there were any injuries, to humans or animals. Shortly after the initial information about the accident was presented, the journalist wrote about the fact that there were no human injuries, and that only one heron was "oiled".
Overall I believe the article was well written, stayed very objective, and gave all of the information necessary to give the people a clear view of this horrible accident in Texas.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Why Do I Want to be a Journalist?
My love of sports has always been a driving force in my pursuit of a career in the communication/journalism field. It would be my dream job to eventually be an announcer or analyst for ESPN or any major sports network. Of course I am realistic in my goals, and so I also chose the communication field of study because I feel like communicating is a strength of mine that I would like to fully tap into. Language is such a critical tool to have in life, because we use it every day that we are alive. If you cannot communicate effectively, or report what you see effectively, life becomes increasingly difficult, especially as we grow up and have to depend on our communication skills more and more to advance in our lives both professional, as well as socially. So I guess communication and journalism is an interest of mine, and I would like to explore these things in order to help me achieve my goals in life on my career track.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
