#11 // Independence in Journalism

What does it mean to be independent as a citizen journalist or blogger? Why is independence considered one of the most fundamental precepts in journalism?

1. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover

Independence is an underlying requirement of journalism, a cornerstone of its reliability. Independence of spirit and mind, rather than neutrality, is the principle journalists must keep in focus. While editorialists and commentators are not neutral, the source of their credibility is still their accuracy, intellectual fairness and ability to inform–not their devotion to a certain group or outcome. In our independence, however, we must avoid any tendency to stray into arrogance, elitism, isolation or nihilism.

And 2. They must serve as an independent monitor of power

Journalism has an unusual capacity to serve as watchdog over those whose power and position most affect citizens. The Founders recognized this to be a rampart against despotism when they ensured an independent press; courts have affirmed it; citizens rely on it. As journalists, we have an obligation to protect this watchdog freedom by not demeaning it in frivolous use or exploiting it for commercial gain.

(http://www.journalism.org/resources/principles-of-journalism/)

This article gives a good overview of how to create a complete journalistic profile using a “Independence and the guide:”

http://www.poynter.org/uncategorized/2128/the-ethics-of-civic-journalism-independence-as-the-guide/

Oh hey also, watch this seven minute video. It rules:

http://www.kcnn.org/principles/independence_in_journalism

#10// Media & Religion

For starters… This is a cool article that has been spreading through facebook feeds today:

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/major-new-study-of-religion-has-much-to-say-about-mormons

But I just like that because I love being Mormon and I love even more when other people love it too!

For seconders… Im taking the majority of my blog from this article from Desert News

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865588254/How-social-and-digital-media-are-changing-religion.html?pg=all

In this article it talks about how religious leaders are following suit and using social media to get their ideas and beliefs out. According to a 2013 Twiplomacy Study done by Burson-Marsteller, Pope Francis is now ranked as the most influential Twitter user based on the average number of retweets he receives from his six accounts in different languages. The POPE! On twitter?! And I assumed it would be Snooki… Regardless, by posting spiritual thoughts instead of just scripture, pastors make themselves a part of the conversation. And isn’t that how you influence people? By not just being the topic of conversation… but by joining it? My hats off to you, Pope. You’re sixty million followers and influences ahead of me.  

Our church is slowly catching up with this media stream in religion. Starting with the “I am a Mormon” youtube channel, they have created an easier environment for those who aren't usually involved with religion and ups the interest level of the average web surfer. I mean, what better missionary work is there?! And who would have thought that the gathering of Israel could have gone cyber. 

#9// The Boston Marathon Bombings

The Boston Bombing Marathons: the first time social media is really used as a medium for news. When the Boston Marathon Bombings occurred, I was living in Zhongshan, China. For this reason… all my information came from facebook, twitter and instagram. Every morning my roommate and I would joke, “gotta read the morning newspaper!” as we scrolled through our feeds. Often times we were given bad information via social media, and were gullible enough to believe it. Did we ever once consider going to an actual news site to get the facts? Absolutely not. We just searched through hundreds of randomly posted articles or blogs or pictures.  Because of this… we were misinformed the majority of the time.

But I blame those problems on the user… on myself. Because I was silly enough to trust everything I read. I actually believe social media is a huge benefit in crisis situations. It spreads news faster than anything… but not just news… also relief efforts and missing peoples and ways to help.

This article is about social media helping the aid effort after typhoon Haiyan:

 http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24565-social-media-helps-aid-efforts-after-typhoon-haiyan.html#.UoKOK_lJOSo

This article is about how social media helped GM resolve complaints and keep customers happy:

http://www.autonews.com/article/20131021/OEM06/310219873/gms-social-media-team-helps-resolve-complaints-keep-customers#axzz2kSu0LwBm

See!! Although there are occasional misleading facts and untrusting scams, the active viewer can use social media to not only help others, but also reap the benefits when needed. As social media partakers, we must have an open and educated mind when receiving news via twitter and facebook. Otherwise, the benefits will slip through the cracks between falsely written and posted articles.

#8// The Future of Journalism

It's hard for me to write on the future of journalism... because that future is so unknown. However, there are many people (much smart than I) who can predict what my future holds. And no, they aren't fortune tellers or gypsies. They're just journalists, like us. 

First, read this:

http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/article/100726/The-Next-Journalisms-Objective-Reporting.aspx

In this article, Philip Meyer says that the future of Journalism lies within companies that are willing to put in the extra time and effort to make the truest of all sources; no objectivity whatsoever.

“But, sooner or later, publishers will learn that to stand out in the noisy buzz of the information marketplace, they will need more trustworthy products. Journalism that yields reproducible results, reviewable by peers, open about its sources and methods, stands to find a privileged place in this new marketplace. You can be its creators.”

(I just think that last line is particularly inspiring.)

Next, read this:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elizabeth-filippouli/journalism-in-a-new-era_b_3808928.html

In this second article, Elizabeth Filippouli talks about how technological innovation and adaptation is the key to our future.

“We are in a new, digital era of news coverage and storytelling. Today we live in the real-time, personal web: the way we find news (or news finds us) is novel, different.”

* * * * * * *

Sometimes it kind of bums me out that I am majoring in something that oh… doesn’t exist anymore? That the old forms of journalism are crumbling… and fast. And then I remember the kind of world we live in. You know, the kind that changes at every moment? So I believe we’re actually at an advantage. And a big one at that. 

#7 // Ethics

The main role of a journalist is to be a watchdog for the community. They covet acting as protectors and guardians of the community against inefficiency and illegal practices. Although there is no philosophical model for this watchdog approach, there is a modern “Code of Ethics” sustained by the Society of Professional Journalists.

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

This code is based on three key journalistic elements: being constitutional, credible and courageous, while upholding the standard to seek the truth. The PBS Frontline Video, the Murdock Scandal, shows the terribly negative effects of dishonoring this code…

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/murdochs-scandal/

News Corporation, established by Rupert Murdock in 1979, is the world’s second largest mass media industry in history. In 2006 the fight began against Murdock’s company for allegedly hacking voice mail-boxes in order to engrave a selling gossip column, The News of the World. Over the next seven years, the spies and lies unfold revealing News Corp to be a substantial offender of SPJ’s Code of Ethics. After this revelation, all ethical notions of this company were lost and countless public relations representatives, editors, and police officials were forced to resign; including police chief Paul Stevenson, special advisor Neil Wallace, editor John Yates, and publishing chief Rebekah Brooks. In the end, Murdock had all the money he could ask for; all the connections he needed; all the power he wanted, but had no ethical creditability, which single handedly choked his most precious tabloid. His two favorite currencies, money and gossip, were not only useless, but now worth not even a dime.

The following article is an interesting one, and although I don't have room to explain it in this post... I'd encourage you to read it on your own time. It details how unethical behavior doesn't just affect the media, but can lead to an entire elitist corruption. 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jul/20/scandal-exposed-scale-elite-corruption

So in the end, being ethical really does conquer all. 

Serves you right, ya liars.

ps... I think this is really funny. 

Why don't we make one? 

#6 // Forty years of government deceit and dishonesty revealed

We debated, err battled, the Snowden case for a bit in class. I've said it before, but I'm a pot stirrer by nature so naturally I loved sitting in and listening (although I didn't have much to say because I was not very well informed on the case). 

If you were like me, and have little understanding of the case - watch these videos: 

(kind of silly, but helps get your barrings) 

To get a little more heated reading about this guy, I just googled, “Edward Snowden, good or bad?”  and found this article that I thoroughly loved. 

http://entertainment.time.com/2013/06/11/hero-or-bad-boyfriend-edward-snowden-and-the-personalization-of-public-debate/

Really. I just want to post the whole article on this blog. Because it’s awesome.

They made some new-fangled points on how the publics are debating this scandal. Instead of looking at the actual problem of NSA Surveillance Techniques being leaked, journalists are trying to pin whether Snowden is a “Villain or Hero.” Why should anyone not personally connected with Snowden give a rats about how good a person he is? Author, James Poneowozikm, said, “As critics of the leak begin attacking the messenger and defenders elevate said messenger as a way of counterattacking. A major public issue becomes another celebrity story, like a Hollywood divorce. The person becomes a proxy for the cause; to admit any flaws (on the one hand) or nobility (on the other) is to give comfort to the enemy, and so he becomes sainted or demonized, depending whose blog you’re reading.” Nobody puts their support for or against the information released in the leakage, but instead they are putting their voices behind this character, Edward Snowden. I know that as journalists, we should be worried about the journalist and whether his actions fall under SPJ’s Code of Ethics. But isn’t there also a part of us that should just be worried about the issue? That if Edward Snowden had the money of Bill Gates or the looks at Tom Cruise it still wouldn’t matter and the problem at hand would remain the same? What I found when researching is that as they seek to please the audience, they write about Snowden. And Snowden alone… why he ran away to Hong Kong & Russia, why what he did was wrong, why he is a total hottie, why he was justified and why he is a bad boyfriend. But in the end, these arguments are stand-ins for the actual issues; they’re not the issues themselves. Shouldn’t we really be thinking, oh shit… Enemy organizations now have a lead on our tactics, or oh well I guess we should decide how much control on privacy the public has. Ya know?  Which is why I think the whole this team/that team thing is so dumb! So silly! You need to have a stance on each issue… not just pick a side and stick with their attitudes. Come’on people! So while it may address the larger privacy-vs.-security issue to argue whether Snowden is a hero, it also says something about people’s inability to frame political issues now through anything other than tribal affiliation.

My side? Snowden was wrong. And he knew it. He is really thought he was doing the public good, he wouldn’t have immediately run into hiding. But we shouldn’t be discussing that. It happened and the privacy info is out – so let’s talk about that. (Maybe I'll even write a part II post) 

But in the end, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as they say.

And we probably won't know the true story for many years, if at all.  

#5// A Valuable Currency

Who Pays For Journalism?

Advertising. Where is my Staples’ “that was easy” button?  

Okay… Actually I want to talk about the “current & future business models.” Specifically, pay per view. And even more specifically, Netflix. Some people argue that Netflix is “bringing gloom to Hollywood,” (Like in this article: http://variety.com/2013/digital/news/netflix-stock-boom-may-bring-gloom-to-hollywood-1200606326/) while users and reviewers rave about the online streaming service.

Brian Stelter kind of started this ferris-wheel of brain activity for me earlier today when he posted on his twitter account, "Was "Walking Dead" helped by binge-viewing of prior seasons? hard to say, but season three's been up on Netflix for two weeks."

(https://twitter.com/brianstelter)

Netflix really has turned it’s viewers into puppets – as they will watch whatever the company decides to stream. And because Netflix is cheap, many users are canceling subscriptions to Direct Tv, Verizon Fios, TiVo and Cable... and using Netflix as their base entertainment. So naturally, that takes away from who is paying for all broadcast journalism. But think about this: what benefit has Netflix had on documentaries? The other realm of journalism. When googling just, “Netflix and documentaries,” you come up with this: https://www.google.com/#q=netflix+and+documentaries+; pages and pages of previously unknown documentaries made by unknown journalists that are found on Netflix. Thanks to this “media money sucker,” hundreds of documentary journalists are getting their work out in the world for people to see. So before hundreds of newspaper journalists rage on Netflix's latest deal with Virgin Mobile, maybe they should re-evaluate. From one artist to another, do we blame Netflix for taking away “what pays for journalism,” by urging users to cut the chord on tv subscriptions… or do we applaud them for aiding our material in being seen? What is the more valuable currency to "pay for journalism?" Cash money or material views? 

#4 // Information In-corrections

In last week's group presentation about "Responsibilities on Journalists, Citizens, and the Public". Their presentation brought two main questions to my mind as a hopeful future journalist... 

1) What do journalists owe the public? 

And 2) What does the public owe journalism? 

The answer, I believe, it truth. The journalists owe the public truth. And the public owes it to the journalists to seek out that truth. The presenting group mentioned that if there is wrong or incorrect news floating around... then social media can fix it; it can “correct the news,” one class member said. Excuse me if I understood that wrong... but what? If anything at all happens... it's the opposite. Those who search for truth... find truth. Those who lazily look on Facebook and see their filter-bubbled and demassified news feed... find this feared falsified fiction. This, I believe is one of the many fallacies of social media.

Fallacy: a mistaken belief, 

especially one based on unsound argument,

 or a failure in reasoning that renders an argument invalid.

The web-based company, Convince & Convert, is dedicated to the transition to social media. They call themselves the "social & content accelerators." They post tips, tricks, and tales of social media networking (www.convinceandconvert.com). In one of their latest articles, The 6 Dangerous Fallacies of Social Media, they discussed the factual basis of social media. Noting that it is most unintentional news libel, what people put on Facebook is based on the rumor.

The following article shows the oxymoronic nature of Facebook fallacies:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/whos-faking-it-pentagon-cyber-warriors-planting-false-information-on-facebook/5320550

In November of 2012, Los Angeles Times published a piece entitled, “Cyber Corps program trains spies in the digital age.” And then explains how big-wig companies are planting false information on social media through illegal tracking, sorting, and hacking programs. Well, obviously… shortly after this article was published, hundreds on Facebook were claiming to have found these trash-seeking blogs, fabricated Facebook pages, and virus filled twitter feeds. Social Networking users were up in arms… furious at the government (because was does the government have to do with this?), they double-checked their privacy settings and scanned their feed for more information on these “Cyber Implanters”… well… come to find out… none of these “false pages” existed. The rumors claiming that Facebook was full of false-truths… were false. If that doesn't show the inaccuracy of social media… I don’t quite know what does.

Just do us all a favor... and don't listen to what your news feed tells you.

p.s. I don't mean to undermine the groups presentation - because it ruled! 

But I'm a pot-stirrer by nature... Forgive me///

#3// The Courageous Watchdog

On Wednesday, we discussed four main responsibilities of a journalist:

1) Two Way Mirror

2) Courageous Watchdog

3) Free-market Place

4) Optimism

The “Courageous Watchdog”. I especially like the first word, courageous. Although journalism requires having and making connections, being a journalist doesn’t always mean you have friends. Probably for this sole reason: your friendship comes second to your story. Occasionally, a journalist’s safety is undermined by the importance of telling the facts. The International Women’s Media Foundation present the “Courage in Journalism” awards every year, giving accolades to journalists who went that extra step to be the watchdog for the people; whether that means getting arrested, having security cameras set up in your own home, or just being hated by an entire nation… they were there. You can read more about these awards and the winners here:

http://iwmf.org/honoring-courage/2012-courage-in-journalism-awards.aspx

I want to specifically point out Asmaa al-Ghoul, a contributing writer for Al-Monitor’s Palestine Pulse. She plays a vital role in uncovering human rights abuses and reporting on development issues, and because of this she regularly “receives death threats and has been beaten by Hamas security forces while covering protests.” If she doesn’t have courage, I don’t know who does. You can read her controversial stories here: 

 http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/contents/authors/asmaa-al-ghoul.html

"This event which I come to just about every year, always humbles me deeply. And it always inspires me. These amazing women encourage me. Their stories uplift me. Their work astounds me and leaves me in awe. It's so good to know that these women and so many others like them are out there every day, risking their lives and their livelihoods in pursuit of the truth. All of us here tonight and around the world are beneficiaries of their courage, their voices and their noble struggle" 

-Journalist, Maria Shriver.

Another word for courage is the less flamboyant "integrity," a word that comprises professional, moral and political integrity in doing one's job as a reporter or analyst. Acting with integrity means honestly probing the causes of the many problems and then suggesting antidotes that offer a way towards a more stable, productive and equitable society. Journalists fulfill this duty as they serve as the Watchdog. 

#2// Creditability

I wanted to blog for a quick second on something that last weeks group only briefly touched on: news creditability. As I said last week, all first-rate reporters and journalists strive for the truth, and the only way to gain that viability is to find & credit yours sources – although the following clip seems to defy all that and explain why some news… just isn’t the truth. At least, that’s what some people say. 

The JFK Assassination was one of the first events that established creditability in the news, as it created the idea of “continuous coverage.” The general public completely leaned on broadcast news and entirely believed this coverage because it was their primary source of knowledge – it was all they had, and because no one person knew more than the next, they assumed it to be true. At the time of JFK assassination, you could rely on media to get the straight facts… but now? What’s happened? And what’s to blame?

I guess I could point fingers way back before the 1941 broadcast journalism beginning, and talk about the “stunt journalism” days, where if there wasn’t anything exciting to be told… they created something to be told. The reach is still the same, all journalists are yearning to write something that yearns to be read… but when they don't cite sources, don't hold creditable interviews, and then chop, rearrange, opinionate and punctuate the facts to make a "news-worthy" story... then it's just turning cantaloupes to antelopes. I mean, according to the following article, “Currently, about two-in-ten say they believe all or most information from ABC News (21%), CBS News (21%) and NBC News (20%)”. Well, that’s pathetic.

http://www.people-press.org/2010/09/12/section-5-news-media-credibility/

So what news can we rely on? And how can we weed out the facts from the fiction?

Anyway, just your daily reminder that's it hard to trust anything anymore! 

Uplifting way to start your weekend, right?

Happy Friday, ya'll! 

Extra-Credit: Brian Stetler Report

Brian Stetler, What is Social Media?

By Jenna Neeley, Section 001

PROVO – Speaking to undergraduate communications students, a New York Times journalist announced an override of the current news system by media-driven tactics occurring over the next decade.

Brian Stetler told a Brigham Young University audience Wednesday afternoon that social media serves as an “around the clock” approach to news. “There are now only three types of media journalism: Facebook, Twitter, and everything else,” Stetler said.

The general publics no longer wait around a television set for the breaking news, because they are instantaneously updated via Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook accounts. Even government officials are using social media to amplify their messages and relay public decisions. New Jersey mayor, Cory Booker, even used his personal twitter account to reach out to civilians during the Hurricane Sandy black out of 2012, inviting one stranded woman to his home to use WiFi. “People feel more connected to their officials when using social media, like they know them on a personal level” Stetler said.

One BYU student said that the Government’s role is to represent its people, and if they do not keep up with social trends, they are missing a majority of their audience. These new message tools allow correspondence between the reporter and the reader; an instigating step towards public participation in media news. Stetler said this “empowers the people”, promoting a more active and aware democratic union.

Reporters and journalists also use tweets and texts as raw material for headliners. Although time-efficient, Stetler noted that these mediums are only complementary to old-fashioned reporting and investigating. They can improve an article, but not completely compile it.

#1// It's Truth

Wednesday, September 11^th Class

As an active member of the Church of Latter-Day Saints, I have grown up believing that my Savior is the center of all things. But upon deciding on a Journalism major… I thought I was entering into an entirely materialistic and world-driven profession. I mean, it’s the news. It’s the gossip, the source-of-all-knowledge to the world and its people. Don’t get me wrong, I love the gossip and I love the talking and I love the scandalous stories. More than just about anything. But after studying the Constitutional principle in the Six C’s of Journalism the connection between Freedom of Press and Freedom to Worship became clear. My connection to my Heavenly Father and my religious beliefs really was connected to the over-exaggerators on every other news station. Beginning in the Enlightenment and finalizing in Smith’s pursuit to restore this Gospel, the press and the Lord were hand-in-hand. And although there are few top-ranked, religion-based national, newspapers or magazines, all journalists are leading to one thing… and that is “The Pursuit of Truth”. I don’t know how to connect this idea to any certain article or any outside idea, because it’s the idea that centers around all things… it’s truth. And it is what every human being, religious or not, should be striving for. It is what binds journalists to the Descriptive World.

“I defie the Pope and all his laws. If God spare my life, ere many yeares I wyl cause a boy that driveth the plough to know more of the Scripture, than he doust.”  - William Tyndale