Media Critique

After the Zimmerman Trial

There is an article written by CNN explaining the George Zimmerman trial. Even though this is a decent article it is missing one thing. That independence and fairness. This article has only one side of the story. The side that believed that Zimmerman was innocent. In this article the author quotes the people that were on the side that believed that Zimmerman was guilty. 

   This article failed to meet the principle that says that journalists must be independent in their writing. This person got the side that believes that Zimmerman deserves to be in jail. Even if this was true and Zimmerman was guilty it was not proven so the journalist should not try to hide his opinions about the trial in his writing. The author quoted Zimmermans brother but that is not good enough. The writer should have quoted people that didn't know Zimmerman and believed he was innocent. The Jurors, for example, would have been great sources. They believed he was innocent so the journalist should have quoted them and gotten their point of view. 

    A yardstick they did not meet is fairness which is about the same as independence. The writer should have gotten more of Zimmermans side. To make this article more nuteral he could have shown Zimmermans side. He should have talked more about Zimmermans struggles and how this trial changed his whole life.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/13/justice/zimmerman-trial

Photo provided by CNN

You Rock Emily!!!

Emily blogs about Freedom of the Press

While I was surfing through the blogs of my classmates I stumbled upon an entry that Emily wrote. She wrote a beautiful post abut the beginning  of free press. She wrote about how John Zenger was the person who introduced freedom of the press to the world. Zenger published a newspaper that slandered the government saying that its corrupt. The governor was angry so  he wanted Zenger arrested, but the judge did not take his side. The judge decided that the truth is the ultimate defense.
     This is what the foundation of journalism is built on, the truth. Without journalists to report the truth we would not have all the rights that we are entitled to today. We couldn't just write a blog talking bad about people and broadcasting the truth to the entire world. Without freedom of press we would be controlled on all of the things that we write and say about people. Emily did a great job explaining all of this and talking about how America is the nation that introduced this incredible right  to the rest of the world. Maybe one day in the near future all countries will give the people a voice.
emilyjounalism1.blogspot.com

Trial of John Peter Zenger

Kitty's Thoughts About the Photographers of 9/11 

Kitty wrote on her blog her thoughts about the photographers of 9/11. She said that this is the event that showed a whole different side to these people, and I wholeheartedly agree with her. Without these photos to remember this horrid event I don't think that this event would have been remembered in the future without these exquisite works of art to help people remember.
      To think that these photographers risked their lives to capture such an important piece of history shows a lot about journalists. It shows that they are willing to face death to get the truth and to report it. It also says that these reporters are loyal to their audience. They wanted to capture these moments so that people can remember this tragety.  Even though these photojournalists didn't physically save lives that day they will always be seen as heroes for their bravery to capture the truth.

 http://ikonxx.blogspot.com/

9/11 photo by Thomas E. Franklin

Newspapers

Newspapers; Why are You Still Around?

If your between the age 13 - 29 then you probably don't get the newspaper. We had a lecture about newspapers a couple of weeks ago and it really made me understand why they are significant. I used to think that newspapers are just for elders that don't know how to use a computer. But my teacher explained why they are still important.
     First they are affordable which makes it easy for people who don't have Internet to know what's going on in the world. Second it has diverse content meaning that it has a little something for everyone in the family. Newspapers are also non linear meaning that you can skip all over the paper rather than reading it page to page which makes it convenient if you don't want to watch the news just to see a story at the very end of the show.
      The one I think is the most important is that it's tradition. Newspapers are part of history and people want to remember them. Aside from having award winning stories New York Times is still in business because it is part of American history and I think that newspapers aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

Mass Communication

Did You Get It?

Our first lecture in journalism was about the definition of journalism. A if part of this definition has to do with mass communication. This is when your message has the potential to reach a mass audience, which all journalists want to do. We spent a good hour and a half talking about this but it didn't stop with just that one lecture. Mass communication is such a huge part of journalism that it comes up  in almost all of our discussions.

      There are two big things that define mass communication and I think that these are very important . One is that it is lost in time and space meaning that you can see it anytime you want which means you don't have to be there at that place or even in the same decade. With the biggest mass communication, meaning the Internet, we can go on YouTube and watch talk shows from the 90s or earlier. The other big thing is that you don't get immediate feedback. 

     I believe that it's very appropriate to talk about mass communication often. It is such a big part of what makes up a journalist. If we didn't have the potential to reach millions, even billions, of people then journalism would probably not be as big or as influential as it is today.

Mass Communication in the 21st century
Design bu DeDe Mulligan

Miss "Unamerican"

Miss "Unamerican"

Thursday of last week we had a current events quiz and one of the questions was about the newly crowned Miss America. It asked why people were so upset about her being crowned Miss America. This is what I found so angering. People said that because she is from Indian decent that she is unfit to represent America. Wake up people! This is the 21st century so why do we still have racisism in this country? 

      This country is supposed to be built on freedom and equality so why are people hating on this poor girl? After the pageant twitter was filled with a bunch of racist comments saying that  Miss America is Arab or that she is a terrorist. First of she is from India so there is a big chance she is Buddhist and second she was born in America so she is an American and therefore she is more than eligible to be Miss America.

    Aren't most people desended from all over the world? So what if she has a family tree that's more recent with people from another country than the other contestants. All that matters is that she was born in America and she is willing to represent the USA. It shouldn't matter if you have relatives from around the world all that matters is that this girl did her best and she won.

     I think that when we talked about this the teacher explained it appropriately and in great detail. This was a very interesting and different topic that we discussed. It shows that even though America has great things about it there are still some flaws and this huge event showed this.

Nina Davuluri
Photo by Maria  Vultaggio

Recordings

Recordings

Last week in journalism we had a through discussion about the history of recordings. I found it very surprising that something we use in our everyday lives and something that affects our lives so much was invented about 120 years ago. People use recordings to listen to music, send messages to loved ones or to learn a new language. Many think that invention is very old but this life changing device is merely a century old.

       Before the first recordings there was no way to get a message across to everyone. You had to be their to hear the message or you missed it. The same goes for music. Before recordings music was only heard from someone's mouth and as the song got passed around many of the lyrics or beats were changed. When Edison invented the first recording device in 1877 he made it mass communication meaning it had the potential to reach a mass audience. This is what made recordings so popular.

     During this lecture I learned a lot of new things. Before I used to think that this innovation was fairly old but it's not. I found it interesting that so many people use a form of this device everyday and they don't realize how it changed the world. Without this creation we would have no recorded music, or be able to spread information all over the world to make people see our ideas. We would not be as advanced in technology as we are today.  

      Overall I believe that this was a great and very insightful lecture. It made me see how people, me included, use everyday items that people take a long time to invent or perfect and we don't even know where they came from, and also how this recording invention came a long way. From being fragile and breaking easily to being able to last for years and years.