Podcasting

http://www.masternewmedia.org/images/podcasting_globe_with_headset_id108564_size420.jpg

   During our lecture on Podcasting, I was inspired to create my own. I have no idea what it would be about, but I know that I would probably talk people to death. I really enjoyed our lecture because it highlighted how to start a podcast as well as the many different websites that facilitate a podcasts creation and management. However, the most interesting part of the lecture was the discussion we had on the importance of podcasts.

    In my opinion the podcast in the university setting is an amazing development. I feel that if professors were more adept at using podcasts for their classes, students would be much more productive and directly improve their grades. For example, in the psychology department, we have a class called research methods and statistics. It is a two semester class that includes a lot of calculation and very little concepts. It is true that we have a book and have lecture three times a week, but during lecture we cannot focus so much on what we're learning because we are feverishly taking notes. If we had the knowledge that we would have a podcast of everything the professor explained, we would have more time to fully take in what she was explaining and then be able to take notes on the specifics during our own time. I feel that many people ignore the value of going over the specifics of what professors say. A lot of the time students are tested on obscure statements made by professors. If professors used podcasting the students could go through the lectures with a fine tooth comb to discover what is and isn't important. Podcasting would also be an amazing tool at bigger schools where one on one time with professors is impossible. I know that if all of my psychology professors employed the use of podcasting, I would be an extremely happy student. 

Twitter: To Tweet or Not to Tweet

http://www.freemarketmediagroup.com/internet-marketing/wp-content/uploads/twitter_bird_follow_me.jpg

I have become addicted to Twitter. The idea of being able to send out my most random thoughts into the technological world is extremely enticing and exciting. I am no longer the passive audience member, I am the producer of my own news. I find that using Twitter is such a phenomenon that its practices get translated into normal activities. I find that during a socially tragic conversation I will say "#fail", knowing very well that the hash-tag is doing nothing in face to face conversation. This was one of the indications that I had become addicted.
Now that I can admit my addiction, which is the first step, I can move on to examining the source of this attachment to tweeting. It is extremely important to recognize the limitations of free speech on Twitter. Last month it was announced that all tweets would be archived by Congress and this new development is extremely frightening. You begin to wonder, "what did I tweet about during the Grammy Awards?" or even "what did I tweet when I was upset with someone?". The question then becomes, to tweet or not to tweet. I believe that all people should be aware of what they are putting on the internet. They should monitor their speech and make better decisions about what is appropriate and what is not appropriate. Should you tweet about what you did last night if it is unacceptable behavior? Should you tweet your every thought and action? No! You shouldn't. While tweeting I try to practice discretion and tact. Everyone should acknowledge the fact that nothing you put on the internet is private, and nothing disappears. It doesn't go to a black hole of internet information, it stays for perpetuity. Remember, its not tweets that ruins lives, its irresponsible tweets that ruin lives.

Second Life

http://www.gameogre.com/reviewdirectory/upload/Second%20Life.jpg 

Second Life is a very interesting and engaging social site. After you get used to it, you can see why some people find it addicting. Before logging in, I was very nervous about using the site because I had no idea what I was supposed to do. I was confused as to how I would interact with others and make my way in the virtual world. I was ecstatic when I arrived at Orientation Island because it helped to explain the ins and outs of Second Life. I found out that you communicate through scripts and discovered the different types of sims I would be able to interact with.
The Second Life world is really interesting for the simple fact that most people behave in the way they would normally. They interact as if they were in the real world and not a virtual world. Because of this I don't quite understand why people would trade reality in for a virtual one. For the most part people seem to behave normally and are still bound to the attitudes and behaviors of our society. I would have assumed that Second Life would be full of chaos because of the limitless possibilities of behavior. Although there are griefers within Second Life, they don't affect game play too much. They seem to be in the minority as well, because most people behave normally.
As for using Second Life, it got rather complicated and a little frustrating. I think if they made the programming a little bit easier, I would have been more interested. Overall, I don't see myself being a frequent user of the site just because I prefer face to face human contact.

Growing Up Online

http://kiwicommons.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Special-Teens-and-the-Internet-300x199.jpg

In the video "Growing Up Online", the impact of the internet on the lives of teenagers is discussed. The video seemed to over-exaggerate the fact that teenagers live their lives with the internet as an extension of it. I personally feel that the so called addiction that young people seem to have with the internet has developed because of the internet's ease. It is extremely easy to do research online, to connect with people online, and to be entertained online. The adults in the film discussed the internet as if it was a plague to the lives of teenagers, when in fact, it is a priceless tool that improves the lives of teenagers. I am not one of those people that uses my desktop or laptop religiously, however, I often use my Blackberry for Twitter, Facebook, email, and general research. I have everything I need at my fingertips and that makes me more efficient overall. For example, I find out things necessary for class and can plan accordingly.
I think the problem with the internet arises when teenagers completely shut out reality in exchange for a virtual one. You can't spend all of your free time on the internet because you are missing out on true interaction which is beneficial to all humans as well as exercise which is beneficial as well. What is important is for teenagers to strike a balance between using the internet and living life.

Wikis

    
http://cc-site-images.s3.amazonaws.com/Video-Previews/Wiki.jpg



     Wikis, as explained in the "Wikis in Plain English Video", are used in order to coordinate between people. It is supposed to be better than coordination through email because it allows everyone to participate and edit information. It would be extremely helpful for large groups who are trying to collaborate simultaneously. It is faster and ensures that all of the participants can view all the changes. With email, one must open the group of emails and compare dates received in order to discover what the plans are.
     For my future career in sports, I feel that a wiki would be extremely helpful. In terms of collaboration, there could be many sports journalists covering one event and displaying new forms of information. With this collaboration, sports stories would be better covered and perhaps more in depth. The idea of the stories being more in depth and better covered would completely benefit the public, which is what journalism is for. I would be interested to see how a wiki for sports journalists would help or hinder the field.
        By moving towards wikis, sports journalists could further their stake in new new media. By moving towards new new media, they could increase their audience base. Although this form of journalism is almost exclusively entertainment based, I feel that the information should continue to follow the methods of journalism. The use of wikis could facilitate this goal.

Bloggers and Freedom of the Press

http://www.merinews.com/upload/thumbimage/1214210664679_freedom%20of%20press.jpg

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/ksc/lowres/kscn1375l.jpg
       I think that the idea of Freedom of Press within the blogging world is a  major issue. It is rather confusing to distinguish between a journalist and a blogger because many people feel that they do the same thing. They both intend to inform an audience and they both work for the people. Because these two groups hold the same intentions, it seems as though they should be afforded the same rights. These rights include the Shield Law, which prevents journalists from being obligated to reveal their sources, as well as a type of freedom from government interference.
       Is it fair for bloggers to be on the outside of these benefits? I personally feel that it isn't. It seems to me that bloggers should be afforded the same rights as journalists because overall they must have a passion for spreading information. If you contrast a blogger with a journalist you can see that one is driven by a paycheck, while the other is driven by their intense desire to inform/entertain. It seems that the power is shifting and that people are now more open to the information presented in blogs than information presented by big news corporations. The fact that advertising is entering the arena of blogging is somewhat causing its reputation to be tarnished, however, not as much as the reputation of big journalism corporations.
        In terms of applying Freedom of the Press to my future occupation of sports journalism, I would attempt to enforce the importance of blogging within the realms of sports. If I were to not be afforded a job within a major news corporation such as ESPN, I would attempt to inform true sports fans about major controversies within the realm of sports. Such controversies to explain could be steroid use and even fraud among sports officials. I feel that having a blogger explain all of these controversies would be better for a sports audience because it means that as a blogger I can state facts without fear of being repremanded. Overall, this goes into the aspect of bloggers having more of a stake in facts and it also goes back to independence from faction.
        People are more likely to trust bloggers on a variety of different topics because they don't have anything to lose, whereas, journalists could lose their jobs. I really think this major difference between these two types of "informers" is what makes it so important that bloggers are afforded Freedom of the Press. The job of protecting citizens and informing people about occurrences within society has shifted to bloggers, and because of that, they should have the rights that are afforded to journalists.
        

New New Media

http://blogs.worldbank.org/files/governance/image/blog%20board.jpg


I am very interested in the aspects of new new media. Since we've discussed it in class, I have come up with the idea of creating a blog for my sorority. The fact that it will be separate from any major news corporation, as well as the fact that it will be run by the members of my chapters sorority, solidifies its new new media qualities. New New Media is complex in the sense that its information does not have to be strictly news based. It also doesn't have to follow the format set out by big news corporations, hence its appeal.

I feel that in order to make a blog successful it has to first entertain people, whereas in news, I feel that informing is more important than entertaining. I also feel that it is important to gage the interest of your readers by allowing them to comment and to suggest new story ideas. This would increase the popularity of the site while at the same time challenge the writers to do stories that may be out of their comfort zones.

In conclusion I would like to say that New New Media is a very important wave of mass media. It encompasses the importance of the individual as well as the importance of reader support. I think creating a blog in this class has opened my eyes to that fact.

Big Ten Weekend

Indy.Com

I'm gonna be downtown this weekend during the Big 10 basketball games. I have always wondered about the different aspects of broadcasting that go into effect during such a huge event. First we would have to examine which news stations would be present. Surely, ESPN and our local news stations will be there. But, we have to think about what stations actually get increased viewership from these games. Most likely cities in which the Big 10 teams are located. So, we should expect all of these cities to be in downtown Indianapolis this weekend. Besides which stations will be in town, we must examine the ease of getting interviews with the players. There is going to be a lot of basketball players here, however, you only want to interview the well-known athletes. It is a given that the local news stations will interview Jajuan Johnson because he is a hometown star. But, after him what should they focus on.
There are so many questions to be asked in sports journalism and I think the answers are very easy to discover based on the purpose of sports journalism. Sports journalism is supposed to entertain people, whereas basic journalism is used to educate, inform, and assist citizens. Because sports journalist don't have to worry about entertaining and informing their audiences, they are free to focus completely on increasing viewership. In class we have been talking extensively about the struggle to inform as well as entertain, but we have failed to examine the ease that comes with journalism that focuses on entertainment only. The only road block that I can see with entertainment journalism is the fact that you can't blame low viewership on your intent to inform before you entertain.

Active Audiences

    Within the theories of mass communication, lies the idea that an audience can never be completely powerful. The closest the audience gets to being powerful is in the Limited Effect Theories, The Cultural Theory, and the Critical Culture Theory. These theories don't exlusivley give power to the audience, the audiences power is shared with the media. In the Limited Effects Theory, which was held from 1938-1960's, the media was regarded as not being extremely powerful. This was because theorists believed that the media only reinforced the status quo. They believed that the media reinforced existing knowledge and that the people had the power to manipulate the media. This idea is visualized in the FOX Network. Fox presses its extremely conservative views, but according to this theory, only people who already side with those views will be influenced.
     In the Cultural Theory, beginning in 1980, it is believed that people themselves give meaning to things and that people influence behavior. People are responsible for their actions and the media has no power over the people. This theory also states that television cultivates the reality of the world. In other words, people behave the way they do because they were influenced by parents or caretakers. The media only has the ability to capture the actions of people and broadcast them around the world. This idea can be visualized in reality shows, such as The Real World. In this show people aren't given a script, they are told to behave as they normally would and to ignore the cameras. The show has gotten so advanced that they don't really need physical camera men in the room. They have hidden cameras all over the house.
     In the Critical Culture Theory, beginning in 1980, it is believed that the media operates to maintain the status quo. It also states that the media pacifies people and is comprised of the corruption and debasement of culture. This theory only gives power to the most influential portion of the audience, which leaves the majority of people on the outside looking in. With this theory the audience is only allowed to be active if they have influence in the first place, whereas, most people don't. This theory is somewhat depressing but is definitely true in some facets. Think of how corporate leaders have the power to limit the news that pertains to them. Think about the Enron scandal and how the wrong-doing was scaled over the whole company and not on the few who did the most harm.

Theory of Mass Communication

          

             I would like to explore the many aspects of the frightening form of journalism: "Journalism as a Hypodermic Needle". This aspect of the unscientific mass communication theory is very interesting to me because I'm extremely interested in propaganda, hence the blog name "Loose Lips Sink Ships". I actually care about the strength of mass communication and I like to examine periods in history in which propaganda has affected our society. As of right now though, I just want to describe the reasons in which people of the 1850s up to the 1930s might have truly agreed with this notion.
              During this time period mass communication was being inflated by the invention of many new technologies. In a sense, people of this time were demonstrating the human quality of fearing the unknown.  Media was taking on a more widespread form and this made it easier for media as a whole to infiltrate numerous areas of one's life. Also, this was a time of war and a time when the governments of many countries were seeking more serious methods of controlling their citizens, hence the creation of propaganda.
               Propaganda was used extensively during this time as well as after to influence the thoughts of citizens. In its most purest form, propaganda was able to keep the citizen in the category of passive. The passivity of the audience can be attributed to the fact that the citizens had no methods of challenging the statements that were being presented to them. Therefore, they were subjected to information that was viewed as being unbiased.
             With this information in mind, it is easy to understand how media could be identified as being overwhelming and undermining to the social order. Citizens weren't free to make up their own minds and the media facilitated this domination that really was based in the government.

To Inform or to Entertain...That's the Question

http://www.hdtvsolutions.com/images/articles/HVR950NBCNewsHD.jpg

http://www.dudehisattva.com/couricolbermann.jpg

http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/20041201/kiran_chetry.jpg

In our readings for last week we were introduced to the idea of entertainment within normal news. According to the reading, the job of the news is to inform as well as entertain the masses. I can truly understand how difficult this must be for journalists today. We are living in a world of star obsession and reality television. We are enticed only by what seems fun, exciting, and even shocking. The news doesn't always encompass these things and that is the downfall of our news media today. It is unable to entice people who can see anything they find exciting on demand, via internet or cable television. With this in mind, journalists must be more aware of their ever changing audience. They must seek out new and alternative ways of presenting important information to readers and viewers. The world of journalism is changing and in this new world it is the journalists job to pull in viewers.

I feel it is the duty of journalists to change with their viewers. By changing with their viewers, journalists can provide the news that is needed to keep our country running democratically. Without information, the citizens of the country are unable to make informed decisions. Because of this fact, we can see the importance of journalists in democratic society. It is a journalists duty to inform and if that can only be accomplished through evolving with their viewers, then that should be the path taken. I don't know where a medium between information and entertainment lies, but we all have to remember that the goal of news is to serve the people. The news doesn't belong to journalists, it belongs to the people. There are journalists that behave as if news belongs to them and as if the golden of age of news has passed. I feel it is most important to convert these people so they can see the importance of the viewer in the organization of news.

Comprehensive Sports Journalist Website

http://www.newavenue.net/

I was searching around on the internet and I happened to discover an article about a national sports journalism website. This site is supposed to have appeal to people who are interested in sports broadcasting, marketing, or those studying sports journalism. This website screams to me because sports journalism is my passion. I was very interested in the fact that this website must compete with ESPN.com as well as ESPN magazine and cable channels. When you actually think about it, people who love sports automatically go to ESPN when they want the latest sports news, statistics, and game analysis. Because of this, I began to wonder, what can this site offer that ESPN as a whole can't? First of all it is based on the web unlike ESPN. This idea is massively important because we are in a day and age where people search the web for their news. We learned in class about a term called "info snacking" this is the idea that people don't generally go on the web to read entire articles. They go on the web and get the summary of what is happening in the news. ESPN is very good at putting the main points on their home site. On game day they include schedules, scores, and analysis from sports experts. So once again I ask, what can this new comprehensive sports site do?

Perhaps this website's main goal is to appeal to those who know about journalism and who aren't just interested in game scores. Perhaps this site wants to entice true journalists who want to see more news writing and not just a recap of the game by an ex-player. I'm an avid ESPN.com and cable channel user and I know that ESPN tends to focus more on quick facts than on actual physical sports writing on their website. Maybe this new site intends to pick up the slack and create a clean form of sports journalism complete with statistics and facts, but they want to put it in a more journalistic form online. I totally support this idea and commend the website creaters for attempting to raise the standards of sports journalism. I personally feel that sports journalism is becoming close to the purest form of journalism and this website is attempting to make it even more pure. For that I commend them. ~Loose Lips Sink Ships~

article:
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/normal/11885.html
sports site:
http://sportsjournalism.org/

Sports Journalism

In sports journalism, there is a lot of stress on being fair, unbiased, and balanced. This is because sports journalist only have the job of presenting a particular sporting event and commenting on what they witness. They can speculate about the thoughts of coaches and of players, but they are generally guaranteed a press conference with coaches and players after every game. Because of these things, I propose that sports journalism is the closest thing we have to the original pure journalism of centuries ago. This realization is extremely disheartening because it shows that a news form based in entertainment holds the qualities that hard news should hold. This is perhaps why I would like to be a sports journalist. I want to present sports in a way that allows people to decide on who has true talent and who doesn't. Sports journalism is fact based and that is how many fans see it. You often hear people debating about the abilities of a specific team or player. Because sports journalists have concrete evidence of the stats they report, they can be fact checked. Because they can be fact checked, they hold a higher standard than a lot of news that is digested by the public today. Perhaps hard news journalists should take some tips from sports journalists.

Outfoxed

I thought the video Outfoxed was very informative and engaging. It showed how little variety there is in the world's public media. I was blissfully unaware of this fact until we viewed the movie in class. I was mortified at the fact that Fox News spreads its own form of propaganda to the masses under the cloak of "Fair and Balanced". I think it's unfortunate that so many people remain unenlightened about their intake of "news". What Fox News broadcasts can hardly be considered news because it has a clear and basic opinion. The duty of the news is to remain unbiased and to present both sides of all arguments. Fox News completely throws this idea out and opts for a more biased approach that employs the use of fear mongering, distorted visual aids, and the phrase "some people say". I am making it my mission to educate all people around me to investigate their news. We live in a day and age where our journalists can't be trusted and where are news is tainted.

Another issue that this movie brought up is the organization of the news and those who are covered in it. During class we got into a debate about why normal people and things that affect normal people aren't covered in the news. The most important aspect of that debate centered around the FACT that women are overall quoted less than men. This fact is shocking and deplorable. During class someone stated that women aren't covered or quoted in the news because they don't hold high positions in society. The idea of this statement being a justification for the patriarchal views of the news media is ridiculous. Our society is dominated by men because so many aspects of it were created by men with the inner workings that support men continuously. Men recieve many unearned benefits in our society and it is a result of extreme patriarchy. For students in our class to follow along with this horrible idea is demoralizing because I can see just how unfair it is on both sides. It is unfair for men to not realize that they have a higher status in our society and it is also unfair that their status is unearned. The news should be one of the areas where your race, gender, sexual preference, or culture shouldn't matter. An individual's news value shouldn't be based on these things because when they are, many groups are left out of the news industry.

Is Your Bowl Super?

Anna Sheffield

                                                                                                                                 Michael Conroy/AP

My Superbowl will be super because two of the top rated quarterbacks in the NFL will square off to be champions of the world. Lets go over the facts and see which team has a better chance of coming out on top.

Saints:

• Top Offensive Players: Drew Brees, Pierre Thomas, Marques Colston
• Top Defensive Player: Jonathan Vilma
• Regular Season Offensive Yards: 403.8
• Regular Season Defensive Yards: 357.8

Colts:

• Top Offensive Players: Peyton Manning, Joseph Addai, Reggie Wayne
• Top Defensive Player: Clint Session
• Regular Season Offensive Yards: 363
• Regular Season Defensive Yards: 339.2

Now for the quarterback comparison. Peyton Manning and Drew Brees define excellence at the quarterback position. Both can be described as perfectionists and as the leaders of two determined teams. Drew Brees has the higher quarterback rating for the season at 116.1. He threw for 4,388 yards and 34 touchdowns. A pretty spectacular season for the Purdue University graduate. Now on to Peyton Manning. Manning is just below Brees in quarterback rating at 104.6. He threw for a 4,500 yards and 33 touchdowns. Peyton Manning's college career at Tennesee was stellar and highly publicized unlike Brees'. However, both quarterbacks have proved themselves a force in the National Football League. Of course a major difference between these two lies in their previous "big game" victories. Manning has already solidified his place in NFL history by winning Superbowl XLI in 2006. It is now Brees' time to show that is should also be considered in the debate of football's greatest quarterbacks. Peyton Manning grew up in New Orleans and attended many games during his father's years as the Saints quarterback (1971-1982), and Drew Brees played college football in Indiana. With all of the excitment surrounding Superbowl XLIV there are many questions. Will experience play a factor in the "big game"? Will the Colts solidify their dominance in the NFL? Will the Saints finally win their first Superbowl? Who wants it more? These questions and more shall be answered February 7 th 2010. Is your bowl super? ~Loose Lips Sink Ships~

I feel that an introduction may be in order, and because of that I intend to oblige. My name is Kazmyn Perry and my career goal is to become a sports journalist. Because this blog is supposed to pertain to this future goal of mine, I shall include many things that I consider noteworthy in sports. Also, because a blog is a form of citizen journalism, I plan to write about current events as well as things I find interesting in my current journalism class. I hope you're ready to embark on a wonderous journey of enlightenment that will be full of twists and turns and bridges and streams and valleys and hills. To end this first blog entry I will include a saying that will be found on the end of every post I make. Remember, ~Loose Lips Sink Ships~