Showing posts with label extra reading. Show all posts
Showing posts with label extra reading. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

Review: "Press Critic George Seldes Leaves a Legacy of Courage" by Jeff Cohen, Norman Solomon (7/12/95)

George Seldes is probably one of the coolest journalists to have ever lived, and not just because he lived for more than a century! He truly did leave a legacy of courage; his resume boasts impressive scoops, stories and coverage of things far beyond what any reporter in his day was doing. The fact that he so boldly wrote about historic figures like Lenin and Mussolini and "pulled no punches," is something that deserves a lot of recognition. If I were a journalist in that day (forgetting that I'm a woman), it would take a lot of guts to risk my life for reporting on such historic figures as Seldes did. I haven't received a death threat yet, but I suppose if I do, I know my journalism must be pretty good! (Jokes.) Seldes' blatant disregard for what people think is something that few journalists have these days. His way of reporting may not be the best way to go about it these days, but to some extent, would be refreshing. I think every journalist should bear Seldes' words in mind, that "uphill battles" are "intrinsic to doing good journalistic work." The average journalist may not face nearly as many as Seldes did, but it makes me think we should definitely complain a lot less about the minor setbacks that do come along. 

Monday, September 23, 2013

Review on "Bearing Witness 2.0: You Can't Spin 10,000 Tweets and Camera Phone Uploads" (Huffington Post, 7/13/09)

Whenever I read about other countries simply shutting off the Internet or phone service, I absolutely cringe. For someone who clings their iPhone for dear life and uses the Internet daily, I cringe at the thought. Then again, I guess that was life for anyone born before the Internet and mobile phone existed.

"It [the Chinese government] slammed the door in the face of new media -- and offered traditional reporters a front row seat."

It makes perfect sense. The "new media" know what's really going on, while the "traditional reporters" have no idea. Not to say they're clueless, but with the efforts the Chinese government go to block the Internet, the government is getting exactly what they want. Ironically as I write this post, a former classmate of mine who is now living back in China just posted this on Facebook:

"there's really no ethics in news writing in China. I was just doing some initial research about the Chinese farmer's market in Chinese news report, and realize that so many articles are written by coping/pasting a few original report's content and one source, and not even giving credits to those few original sources. SERIOUSLY??"
If the Chinese government don't want the media to know what's going on, they appear to go to any length to hide it. But the title of this article remains true- though the government can do all they want to try and censor and block comments from people, the amount of content posted going against the government daily is too much not to notice. 

Review on Maha Azzam, "How WikiLeaks helped fuel Tunisian revolution" (CNN.com, 1/17/11)

Quite the opposite from the Foreign Policy reading, "The First Twitter Revolution?," this CNN opinion piece gives responsibility to WikiLeaks- not Twitter- when it comes to ending the regime of Ben Ali. 

"Anyone doing business in Tunisia, be they local or foreigner, would have been aware of the power and control of the Ben Alis, the Trabelsis and the coteries of power that surrounded them. However, the WikiLeaks revelations added to the "disgust" that many Tunisians had already been feeling at the chasm in wealth prevalent in Tunisian society, a country where unemployment runs at 30%."
WikiLeaks firmly attributes the responsibility, though with the help of Twitter, the success of the Tunisian revolution great. 
"Today's technology provided them with channels that despite their government's restrictions, proved invaluable in spreading information and support for the protests, while WikiLeaks merely further exposed an already discredited and reviled regime."
Azzam is definitely right in making claims that today's technology was beneficial in making progress in Tunisia. Today, social media like Twitter connects anyone through a simple hashtag, and makes newsworthy information stand out. After all, with only 140 characters, either you'll get the picture or click a link for more, ultimately informing yourself about something you may not have known otherwise.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Review on Nathaniel Flannery's "Mexico's revolution will not be televised" (Global Post, 6/21/12)

I had never heard of this uprising, but then again, why would I have? 

Nathaniel Flannery starts out this article "On a recent Sunday," leaving me only to assume that because of this lack of television coverage, it was unclear what Sunday it had occurred on! Either way. 


“The people, quiet, will never be heard.” Well not after this article, and I'm sure the others that followed. It's hard to believe that a television station is so biased they wouldn't even cover presidential debates, a surefire way to boost ratings and gain an audience. 


The fact that the debate was broadcasted over YouTube truly speaks to our generation and how technology has advanced our thinking. 

The other thing about this article that shocked me was this quote: 
"Some 95 percent of homes have a television in Mexico, Latin America’s second-largest economy. While Mexicans have a host of cable channels to choose from, cable only reaches 30 percent of all households, according to a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Emilio Azcarraga Jean, the billionaire owner of Televisa."
Cable only reaches 30 percent of all households?! 

And reading further, "Governor Peña Nieto was paying for favorable TV coverage," and allegedly adding up to $3 million? The corruption and injustice remains to astound me. 

It was good that this story ended on a positive note, that the 132 movement actually made significant changes. Mexico should have the right to know who they're voting for. 

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Review on News21.com: Carnegie-Knight Initiative on the Future of Journalism Education

At first glance, the News 21 website catches my eye. The bold color choice, big font and picture of what one can assume is a student. Immediately I want to relate to this website, as I too am a student journalist. I noticed any journalism student can actually contribute to News21 (applications are due Nov. 1!) and that News21 offers their content to anyone for free.

Their projects don't look like college students developed or worked on them. That being said, I'm sure some people probably don't even read the front page of the website and have no idea that college students run this site. I also noticed there are no advertisements hosted on the website, which is quite refreshing! I think I'll be adding this page to my bookmarks!