No more blogging for me

As Journalism 420 draws to a close, so will my blogs. While this has been one of the easier assignments for this class, it has taught me a lot.

Consistency is essential when it comes to online blogging and Web site updates. If bloggers don't consistently write something, they will lose readers. Fortunately for this class, everyone has to continue reading until they've made their required number of comments and posts, but that doesn't make the lesson any less important.

Blogging has also taught me to use key words for my headlines ... or to write interesting enough headlines that people want to see what I'm talking about. As a copy editor, I know your average rules for writing print headlines, but headlines for the Internet are different and a little more challenging.

Blogging has also taught me to think more critically. Throughout the semester I've looked at other new organizations' Web sites and questioned what the editors did and why they did it. By questioning others, it makes me question the reasons I do certain things.

And finally, blogging this semester was just plain fun. I learned to link to other stories, post pictures and throw a text wrap in my posts here and there. It was something I hadn't done before, and I enjoyed it.

Extreme shopping

As I was checking my blog, I happened to look at the Google News gadget on my screen.  One of the stories for U.S. news was "Wal-mart worker dies after shoppers knock him down." I couldn't believe it. I have always heard about the intense shoppers that come out for the day-after-Thanksgiving shopping, but I never imagined it to go that far. 

I didn't have a particular reason for including this story on my blog. I just thought it was a well-written article that grabbed my attention. The story itself was interesting, and it didn't have any major holes in it. It's refreshing to see a news story that is simple yet intriguing. The reporter didn't have to go digging for a scandal, and the copy editor didn't have to write an amazing headline to grab my attention.  Don't get me wrong, the story itself is very sad. I was shocked to read that no one stopped to help the worker up. 

Why do I care?

I was getting my every-couple-of-days dosage of CNN news, and its iReport section caught my eye. We've been talking on and off throughout the semester about citizen journalism in my ethics class. The subject caught my attention since the beginning. As editors, we have to decide when to use citizen journalism or when we could get something better on our own. For the most part, I think a station or newspaper should be able to get something better than what a citizen turns in. However, there are always occasions where someone has a really good picture or a really good story angle. If the citizen is willing to turn that in to a news station, I think the station should use it.

But CNN has bypassed that entirely and created its own section for citizen journalism. This obviously has its advantages and disadvantages, but what caught my eye was the article "iReporters wary of auto bailout." The minute I read that headline, I thought, "Why do I care what they think?" The sources used in the story are filmmakers, math teachers, clothing store owners, etc.

These people are important, and the government's decisions affect them. But to me, a news story, especially one about finances, should have the opinions of experts. I don't understand a lot of the terms and jargon involved in financing and bailouts, so I trust the opinion of an expert more than the opinion of your average citizen, especially because these citizens aren't involved in the auto industry. While citizen journalism and citizen's opinions are a good thing and should be used, I don't think it applies to this story very well.

'Highlight' of CNN's Web site

CNN has a lot of convenient and interesting features on its Web site, but one feature that I always forget about is "story highlights." For every story on its site, CNN writes a few bullet points giving the most important information in the story. I always forget about this feature until I'm finished reading an article, but I think it's a great feature.

Readers can learn a quick synopsis of a story without having to read the entire thing. I think this is a good option for people that don't have time to read an entire article. I know a lot of times I see a headline and want to read a story, but at that moment, I don't have the time to read the article. By the time I get a chance to read more in depth, I've forgotten which articles I want to read.

I think this feature is also good for people that like to jump around on Web sites. "Story highlights" gives them the important information they need to know without forcing them to read a 500 word article. Obviously, CNN probably prefers them to read the 500 word story, but maybe people would be more willing to come to their site if they know they can quickly and easily get information.

Because I tend to forget about this feature, I think CNN could make the title "story highlights" bolder or larger to make the readers eyes go to that feature. But overall, I think it's a great thing to have and one that not a lot of Web sites do, at least, not that I've noticed.

Job requirement: organization

I've always been told that as an editor, you need to be extremely organized. You need to know what things are coming up, what reporters are assigned to what stories, etc. While I've always prided myself on being able to juggle multiple things at once, I never realized the extent to which an editor has to be organized until Election Day.

During the weeks prior to Election Day, I watched as all the reporters and news editors at The Daily Illini would meet to discuss how they're going to cover the election. I saw the designers beginning to layout the pages, and I started coming up with potential headlines depending on the outcome of the races. But doesn't most of it come down to who won the election?

Absolutely not. Without all the organization and advanced planning, we wouldn't have printed a paper. Because design had the page laid out in advance, when the final story came in close to drop time, all we had to do was place the story and photo. Because I had an idea for headlines, we had more time to copy edit stories and had to spend less time coming up with good headlines. Because the reporters new what stories they were covering, we knew what time to expect the articles to come in.

We had a big chart in the newsroom that had the schedule for each story: the slug, the reporter assigned to it, the time it was coming in, the time it had to be designed on the page, the time it had to be copy edited, etc.

At the same time, editors have to be able to adapt and change their plan. Just because we are organized doesn't mean everything is going to run accordingly. For instance, students started flooding Green Street when news stations announced that Obama won the election. We had to adapt by sending out reporters and photographers right away and making room for the story online and in print.

Being an editor is a tough job. I think it's more like a balancing act. Be organized, yet willing to adapt to whatever happens.

Watching over ourselves

I was looking at the New York Times's front page, and I was surprised to see two graphics showing whether people think McCain and Obama spend more time explaining what they would do in office versus attacking their rival. According to the poll, 61 percent of all registered voters think McCain spends more time attacking his opponent than explaining his plans, while only 27 percent of voters think Obama uses more of his time attacking his opponent. I thought this was an intersting approach to the election, especially because campaigns have turned negative.

As the election draws to a close, this is the most important time for candidates to be sharing their views on issues, and I think it is the journalists job to get the candidates to answer the those questions. We are the watchdogs of the goverment and it is our job to ask the tough questions. If we don't do it, who will? How can the public make an informed decision if they don't know what the candidates plan to do once they get into office?

While I think this is a newsworthy graphic for the public, I also think this graphic and even the story that is packaged with it, Poll says McCain is hurting his bid by using attacks, should be a wake up call to journalists that we need to do more to inform the public about the candidates' stance on the issues.

Checking up on hockey

On Wednesday, I taught the class some things about hockey and how to refer to certain terms in the sport. Hockey is made up of three periods. It has its own league called the National Hockey League, which can be referred to as NHL on all references, and the league has its own subdivisions. When referencing a specific subdivision, the division must be capitalized, such as the Central Division of the Western Conference. If you are just writing division, simply write, the division without capitalizing the word. I also mentioned that one accomplishment in hockey is the hat trick, which is when a player has scored three goals in one game.

But when I talked to the class, one of the terms I focused on was face off and faceoff. Face off is an interesting verb because it can be used in reference to hockey and other things, such as politicians. The example I found was in a headline that said "Israeli party rivals face off in power bid." When the word faceoff is used as a verb, it is always two separate words.

However, if faceoff is used as a noun or adjective, it is one word. According to Merriam Webster Dictionary, the noun faceoff means "a method of beginning play (as in hockey or lacrosse) in which two opponents face each other and attempt to gain control of a puck or ball dropped or placed between them." In essence, the noun faceoff can only be referred to in hockey of lacrosse (remember this for the quiz). So, if I were to use faceoff in a sentence, I would say, "The faceoff is scheduled to begin at 3 p.m."

To print or not to print

For all of these photos, I think more context needs to be explained. The following statements are the decisions I came up with based on the photo alone. I think much of photo ethics comes from the context of the story and how everything is presented.

1. A boy grieves for his dog after it was killed by a car
This picture is interesting because it isn't gory by any means, but it does evoke strong emotion. My decision to run the photo would depend on what the story is about. If the story is simply the fact that the boy's dog died, I don't think I would run it. In that case, running the photo would be similar to showing a picture of a victim who was hit by a car. This is a picture of a boy being affected by grief and should be treated with care, even though he is grieving over a dog. However, if the story is about an increase in the number of pets being killed by dogs, I think I would run the photo,, even on A1. This kind of story is more news worthy, and the photo can help evoke the kind of emotion that would make people want to take action and help. If this story was local, I think it would make me even more cautious in running the photo because people who know the little boy or dog will see it. The picture will stir up even stronger emotion if it was a local story.

2. A rescue worker tries to console the family of a boy who just drowned in a lake.
I personally would not run this photo. My main reasons for this are outlined in the SPJ code. The SPJ Code states that journalists should "show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage," and "be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief." These two statements make me decide not to run the photo because this photo is showing a family who is grieving for the son they just lost. This photo evokes extremely strong emotions because many of the readers can project themselves into the photo. I would especially not run this photo if it was local. I don't know if there is any way I would run the photo because even if you crop out the dead boy, the family's reaction is too strong and personal. I would simply run the story with a headline and a mug of the boy.

3. Bud Dwyer, state treasurer of Pennsylvania, kills himself at a press conference.
What's interesting about this photo, is my ethics professor, professor Amy Gajda, had to make this exact call for broadcast when the tragedy occurred. When we talked about it in ethics, I completely agreed with her call, and I think it's the decision I would make. I would run one of the other photos in the series. I think one of the other photos was of Dwyer holding the gun up in the air. I think another one was of him with the gun in his mouth. But under zero circumstances would I run this photo. The man is dying; his brains are literally flying back into the flag behind him. Although it is a little unclear in this picture because it is in black and white, it is still a very personal and scarring photo. There is no way this photo should run. If I ran the other photos, I would not put the entire series on A1. The main reason for this is you don't know who is seeing the paper. Little kids could happen to see the big A1 photo, but not a lot of them are going to open the paper and look at the rest. Because this is a huge story throughout Pennsylvania and needs to be printed, I would run the photo of Dwyer holding the gun in the air on A1. It's the least traumatizing, but it still draws the reader's attention to the story. I may run a few of the other photos in the series on the inside, but that depends what they show. The more local the story is, the more inclined I would be to run the photos (not this one).

4. A printing plant employee lies dead after a former employee of the plant shot him.
I think my first reaction to the photo kind of confirms my decision. I would not run this photo. It is not that it is very bloody or gruesome, but it looks like the employee is cut in half. When I first looked at this photo, that is what I thought, and I wouldn't want to mislead the readers. I would probably say no to running this photo on A1. I may run it on an inside page, depending if the splattering on the ground is the employee's blood or ink. In general, I think the newspaper can find a better photo that tells the story. How about people reacting to the shooting or one of the 13 injured getting helped? I think this is an important story, especially if it is local, but I think a photographers can find a better photo to use than the example.

5. Fifteen year old climbing a fence when he fell.
I had the hardest time deciding whether to run this photo or not. Because the reader can easily see the spike coming through his mouth, it makes it a hard photo to look at, but because the boy survives, that makes me want to run the photo. The more I looked at the photo, the more it grew on me to run it. In the end, I think I would run it because it is a very captivating photo that tells the story. The fact that the boy survived is a strong reason I'm willing to run the photo. If he didn't, I wouldn't print it because it would cause harm to the boy's family and friends. If this was a local story, I would be more inclined to run it than if it happened somewhere in Canada or Maine because it has more relevance. I would more than likely run the photo on A1 because it shows the reader how he was able to fall and survive.

6. Mardi Gras riot
This was another difficult decision, although not as difficult as the last one. Just based on looking at the photo, I don't think I would run it, especially if it was local, for the same reason people usually don't print the name of a sexual assault victim. I think it would be extremely traumatizing for the woman in the photo and she should be protected. One of the responsibilities of a journalist is to minimize harm, and printing this photo would not do that. It might actually inflict more harm on the victim. The only reason I would want to run this photo is because it could educate other women or promote awareness of sexual harassment. I might reconsider my decision if the woman was OK with the picture being printed, but as it stands, I would not run the picture. Even if I did decide to run it, I think I would block the woman's face. It is a very graphic picture, too. I would feel horrible if children accidentally saw this photo because they wouldn't know what to make of it. Regardless of if the story is local or not, I would not print the picture. I would actually be less inclined to run the photo if it is a local story because people may recognize the victim.

And the gold medal goes too ...

The Des Moines Register

Ever since I started doing gymnastics when I was 5 years old, I've been obsessed with the sport. USA-Gymnastics.org is one of my favorite Web sites, but I only allow myself to get on every once in a while because I'll spend hours on it, which is not good if I'm trying to get homework done. When I looked at the site on Tuesday afternoon, I was checking out the post-Olympic coverage. I'm always interested to see what Olympians do after the hubbub of the competition is over. Because four of the six women on the Olympic team were from the Midwest, I was especially interested to see how their local papers covered them.

When I went on the Des Moines Register's Web site, I was shocked. The site had some of the most extensive coverage I've seen on a gymnast, even compared to the USA gymnastics Web site. The Register had an entire page dedicated to Shawn Johnson (http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=SHAWN_JOHNSON&template=landing). The page includes videos, stories, photo galleries, interactive maps, links to related sites and downloadable posters. The Register even did a story on Johnson's coach, Liang Chow, who competed on the Chinese national team when he was younger.

One of the photo galleries I browsed through had 304 photos. I only got through 112 of them before I decided I should start blogging, but some of the pictures dated back to 2003 when Johnson was 11.

I think the most interesting multimedia the site had was a break down of Johnson's routine for each event. Not only did the site give an in depth look at her routines, but it also described each apparatus and competitors to watch out for. The interactive presentation was put together extremely well because it gave a lot of information with little text. Instead the site used pictures and graphics to show readers how everything worked. This was by far the best presentation of routines and equipment that I've seen.

The way the Des Moines Register covered Johnson's routines is an example of what editors should do for other sports. This way of presenting the information has a lot of opportunities and allows the editors to be creative.

And as a random plug, some of the Olympic gymnasts, including Shawn Johnson and U of I's own Justin Spring, will be coming to Assembly Hall on Nov. 5 for the 2008 Tour of Gymnastics Superstars.

Celebrity news

When I got on CNN.com this morning, Sept. 24, I saw that one of the top stories was about Clay Aiken coming out of the closet. But the story wasn't just about him coming out of the closet, it was about Aiken coming out of the closet in People magazine. Although it was a small article, about 160 words, I couldn't believe it was on the CNN Web site, let alone one of the top 10 stories (it was number nine). Is this really news? I feel like there are more important things going on in the world.

I would have understood if the reporter did a profile of him. He did just become a father, and I think a lot of readers would be interested to see how everything goes raising a child not only as a celebrity, but as a gay celebrity. Does he still plan on singing and recording or is he going to step out of the limelight to raise his child? Is the child the reason he decided to come out of the closet? I think the reporter could definitely have done a lot more with the story.

Questioning news that is questioning bailout plan

In the Sept. 8 lecture, we discussed the new perspective of news analysis. Follis explained that news analysis sounds like opinion, but it is more objective. The idea behind it is the reporter knows so much about a topic that they can analyze the facts. However, she said the line between analysis and opinion is still blurry.

Keeping this in mind when I was reading a news analysis article on the financial crisis, I found that the blurry line between analysis and opinion can potentially be dangerous. The New York Times article called Experts See a Need for Punitive Action in Bailout was analyzing the $700 billion bailout plan. But instead of giving both sides, the reporter only gave one. He quoted many experts, both conservative, liberal, former employees of the federal government and employees of financial institutions, but they all say the plan isn't going to work. The reporter does a great job of supporting this side, but by the end of the article, I'm wondering why the federal government is even considering this plan. The reporter only includes two people that support the plan, and one is Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Jr. The other doesn't come into the story until the very end.

To me, this story seems to be an opinions piece masquerading as an analysis or even objective news. Because the story is labeled as analysis, the reader assumes the reporter will look at all sides of the story and come to a conclusion after doing so. However, this reporter only looked at one side of the story. He does a great job covering why people are questioning the bailout plan, but he answers them with one view. The lack of balance in sources leads me to believe that the reporter doesn't think the bailout plan will work.

I think a story by CNN, Stocks stumble at the close, does a much better job of explaining some of the aspects of the financial crisis. The reporter actually explains what is going on in the market and what the federal government plans to do to fix it. CNN does a great of job of being perfectly clear that all the details for the bailout plan haven't been worked out yet, so it can't be fully analyzed.

While I don't necessarily think the bailout plan will work, I think it is important that journalists report all sides of a story. The federal government thinks this plan will work for a reason, and readers should know that side as well.

Drawing the line between entertainment, news

When I got on the Internet around 11:30 a.m. Tuesday, my homepage pulled up a story on a serial rapist near the University of Nevada at Reno. Considering the saftey issues U of I has had on its campus, the story caught my attention.

The story itself was good. It told all of the necessary information, including both breaking news and background details. But what caught my eye was the video. Throughout the entire video, CNN had music playing in the background. The music was the kind you would hear in the middle of an action scene during a movie or on the previews for court TV. Considering the anchor for the story, Nancy Grace, used to work on court TV, this didn't surprise me. However, the editors should have made the decision to either delete the music or play a more appropriate genre.

Linking the slaying of a student with a serial rapist is a serious topic, and it deserves a serious tone in the news coverage. Playing music in the background that you would hear in a movie diminishes the gravity of the story and makes the coverage appear like entertainment.

Media already has a problem drawing the line between news and entertainment. With shows such as "Inside Edition," "Rescue 911" and "Unsolved Mysteries," the industry struggles to define which genre certain shows belong to.

Nancy Grace has received criticism in the past when a guest on her show, Melinda Duckett, committed suicide after a confrontational interview in 2006. The story was covered by a number of big networks and papers including ABC, the Washington Post and Fox News. The Associated Press also wrote their own story about it.

If the news we're covering is going to be taken seriously, editors need to ensure that it is being covered in an appropriate manner, and that includes music.

Doing more with statistics

When I was checking CNN.com this morning, I ran across a story titled "Group wants states to raise driving age." First of all, this story caught my attention because I wanted to know what group was suggesting this idea. Not to be too picky, but I think the headline should at least say "Research group wants states to raise driving age." This headline is at least a little more specific. The copy editor also could have included the name of the group because Web sites have unlimited space.

The story goes on to explain how the research group, Institute for Highway Safety, wants to raise the driving age to 17 or 18 in all states. The story included quite a few statistics showing the number of teenage crash-related deaths in different states. Because I'm not someone that likes to read statistics in the middle of stories, I usually skip over them. However, these statistics are essential to the story because they're the reason the research group wants to raise the driving age.

I think a better, or at least quicker, way to include this information would be in a graphic. Graphics are a quick and easy way for a writer to get a lot of information across in a small space. They catch the readers' eye and pull them into the story.

In this case, a graphic would allow readers to see comparisons of crash-related deaths across states, crash-related deaths among different age groups, etc. The article stated that New Jersey issues licenses at 17. I think it would be interesting to see how their statistics compare to statistics for a similar size state that issues licenses at 16.

Simply put, the writer could have done more with that statistics in this story by making a graphic.

Importance of Punctuation

As I was perusing stories on the Chicago Tribune's Web site, I came across a story - a sentence really - that demonstrated the importance of punctuation and editing.  The story, titled AAA: Gas prices, wicked weather, cash shortages could cut into Labor Day holiday travel" is obviously about Labor Day traveling this year.  About the seventh paragraph in, the reporter, Kelli Kennedy, wrote, "A strip along Panama City Beach was lined with traffic and vacationers enjoyed parasailing, and shopped idly at gift shops and sipped colorful drinks at tiki bars."  

The number of "ands" in the sentence made it really confusing.  If I was editing the story, I would ask Kennedy how the sentence is supposed to read because changing punctuation in this sentence could alter the meaning.  

To me, the sentence looks like it should read, "A strip along Panama City Beach was lined with traffic, and vacationers enjoyed parasailing, shopped idly at gift shops and sipped colorful drinks at tiki bars."  Again, I would ask the reporter because that could be a lot different from what Kennedy was trying to get across.  

The story can be found at

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-labor-day-travel,0,1728564.story