MassLive Photo Submission

For this assignment, I posted a photo to the Mass Live's album of the October snow storm.

Often when I am on campus, I find myself wanting to take pictures of trees. There are such a variety of trees on campus,  and when I see a really good one, I'll often take a picture of it with my phone.

After the snow storm in October, so many trees were destroyed around campus. I saw one tree on campus that had completely split down the middle, and I took my phone out right away to capture it.

After searching Mass Live for content that I could contribute to, I realized that I could add my picture to the October snow storm album. The album was interesting because it showed a progression from people enjoying the snow to some of the devastating effects of the storm. It definitely was a whirlwind of a weekend, and this progression of good and bad is represented well in the album.

I was hoping that people would comment on my photo, but there was not much user activity, likely because the snowstorm is slightly old news. I expect that this timing has a lot to do with the lack of comments. On the other hand, it was neat to be able to view the album after it was for the most part complete. Since I already know the entire result of the storm, it may have been a different experience than if I were to upload my picture as it was still happening. I am glad that I was able to see the whole album as an entire story.

Highs and Lows

I definitely feel like this was one of my better classes so far at UMASS.  I have taken a lot out of this class, and I feel like I have had the opportunity to explore so many new platforms of journalism, written and online.

My favorite part about this class was that we had the opportunity to be involved in various assignments and projects that all served unique purposes.  I can’t believe how many new processes and websites I have become familiar with, especially considering we only met once a week for one semester.  At the beginning of the semester, I wrote that I was looking forward to having assignments that would force me to get out of my comfort zone.  I definitely feel like I have been able to do this, as I have participated in several journalistic endeavors I would not have normally, such as writing a letter to the editor, or calling a radio station.  I had never even kept a blog before this semester, and now I feel very comfortable blogging.

This was my first semester taking any journalism classes, so I went into the class trying to determine whether I would still want to pursue the field.  Various aspects of this class have definitely made me excited about pursuing journalism further.  I really like the idea of blogging, and I could definitely see myself keeping a personal blog, especially since I am studying abroad next semester.  I also became a lot more aquainted with Twitter this semester, and I can now understand the journalistic value of this type of communication tool.  I really enjoyed learning about Twitter, and how it has enabled democracy throughout the world.  I did not really recognize the functional potential of social networking sites, and I feel like it is an invaluable skill to know how to fully utilize technological tools and networks, especially as a journalist.

I think my favorite assignment this semester was writing a letter to the editor.  As I mentioned before, this is not something I would normally do.  This in itself made the project exciting because I feel like I can get the most out of experiences that force me to do something new and different. I really enjoyed the assignment because I found an issue in my hometown that I actually knew a lot about.  I didn’t know that I would be so personally invested in the assignment until I submitted my letter.  I was surprised by the excitement and anxiety that overtook me after I sent off my e-mail.  I kept reciting the parts of my letter that I remembered over and over in my head, trying to determine whether I should have written anything differently.  As I also mentioned in a previous blog post, I found out that my letter was published from one of my high school teachers.  Finding out in this way definitely made it really rewarding, and it made the whole thing an even more exciting experience.  Beyond my own personal experience writing letters to the editor, it was really interesting to learn about the overall significance of letters to the editor in our society and our democracy.  I used to skip over the letters to the editor in magazines and newspapers, thinking that it was merely readers complaining for no good reason.  Even if that may sometimes be the case, I now understand the value of a two-way conversation with all outlets of writing and media.  I liked learning about letters to the editor because I feel like they epitomize this conversation in the most basic and traditional sense.

The thing that I struggled most with in this class was trying to join the conversation with talk radio.  It was in ways a discouraging process because it made me feel like there is so much I do not know, rather than making me feel empowered and unstoppable like some of the other assignments did.  That is obviously good, however, because there is a TON I don’t know, and recognizing where you need to improve is definitely the best way to learn.  Although I could not become fully knowledgable about all of the topics being discussed on talk radio shows, I did become a lot more literate about the whole talk radio process as well as some of the issues they were talking about.

Overall, I feel like this class has made me a lot more aware of the news going on around me, as well as my role as a reader and a potential journalist.  I am starting to be more alert to things around me, recognizing things that I may have once overlooked as potential stories.  I know I have so much more to learn about journalism, but this class has been a great starting point, and I am very excited for what lays ahead.

Reddit

After dabbling with Reddit over the past few days, I gained a pretty decent understanding of the site. It became easier to understand the more I used it, but there are some parts of it that I didn’t like.

One thing that I do like about Reddit is the organization that allows you to browse links in different categories or “subreddits”.  This made it easier to hone in on links that interested me.  I also liked the fact that the site is oriented more toward news links than other networking sites. 

Though I think that Reddit is a pretty good site, I think that improvements can be made with its aesthetic design.  It may sound silly, but I think that colors and fonts can make a big difference.  When looking at the Reddit site I get this feeling of overload that could be easily remedied by a more appealing appearance.

I also was not a huge fan of the ranking system on Reddit. I tried to do some research about the meaning of the numbers, but it still confuses me a bit.  I do understand, however, that you are supposed to click the “up” arrow if you like a link, and vice versa. I was not even sure about this though until I googled it. It may have just been me, but since it turns orange when you click up and blue when you click down, I wasn’t sure which was supposed to be positive and which was supposed to be negative. This goes back to design.  I associated the blue color with “good” and the reddish color with “bad”, but it is actually the other way around.

I browsed several subreddits about news and music where I did my up-voting and down-voting. 

Here are a couple of the links I posted:

This is a news story that I linked from BBC News about HIV positive individuals in China who have been denied public jobs. I posted it in the worldnews subreddit. I posted it under “Unbelievable discrimination against HIV positive individuals…”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-15928453

I posted this link to a RollingStone article that talked about Jason Segel in the filming of the Muppets. I posted it under the movies subreddit.

http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/blogs/the-travers-take/off-the-cuff-muppets-star-jason-segel-cried-when-he-met-kermit-20111121

I noticed that Reddit did not allow me to post a link that had already been posted by someone else.  I’m not sure whether this is a feature that I like or dislike.  I think that if there is a good story, then more submissions would make it more viewable. I understand that a story can rise in the ranks if people like it, but I feel like a good link could possibly go unnoticed if it doesn’t get a chance to circulate to people in the first place.

Storify: Victoria's Secret Fashion Show

At first, I wasn’t sure how I was going to choose an event to write about on Storify.  I didn’t know if I should browse Twitter to see what people are talking about, or to find an event and then see what people are saying.  I ended up seeing something that many of my Facebook friends were buzzing about last night, and decided to make that my story: The Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show.

Although the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show may seem trivial, it was an event that provoked tons of public response, so I thought it would be worth writing about.  It may or may not be a good thing that these types of shows gain so much public attention, but the fact is that they do, so it is worth examining.

When creating my story, I initially wanted to show varying opinions about the show.  Since the show delivers a controversial message about body image, I thought that some people may have posted about their disapproval. I was not able to find, however, a single negative comment about the show. In fact, the only negative words people used were to describe themselves in comparison to the “perfect” specimens they viewed on TV.

Since I did view a lot of women obsessing about their body image, I decided to write about how the fashion show should be aware of the potential implications of the message they are sending. I think that the show is really entertaining to watch, but I could not even watch it without feeling slightly guilty about supporting it.

View my story here: VS Fashion Show 2011

Yelp!

I had a pretty good experience using Yelp for the first time.  I chose to write reviews about two of my favorite restaurants, one in Amherst, and one back home.

I chose to write about Bruno’s Pizza, which is located in downtown Amherst. It is one of my favorite places to get food late at night if I am nearby. (Even if I usually regret it the next day…)

I also chose to write about one of my favorite delis in my hometown.  It is the type of place that always makes everyone really excited when they are about to eat there.  Since this deli is one of my fondest places in my hometown, I knew it would be a good place to review.

I chose to write about places that I really like, meaning that both of my reviews were of course positive.  I felt good about promoting these restaurants, especially because they are both smaller establishments.

Several of the reviews on Yelp were negative.  I definitely think that these entries would be helpful if I were looking for a place to go, but I don’t know if I personally would ever go out of my way to write a bad review for a business

I found Yelp to be pretty easy to navigate and use.  I definitely think that it could be a helpful tool to use when exploring new areas.  I’m not sure if I would regularly write more reviews in the future, but I would definitely consider using it read the reviews of others.

Bruno's
The best pizza I've had in Amherst! It is very easy to get food quickly if you stop by late at night. The only down side is that you can't get pizzas by the slice. But definitely recommended! There is not much space to eat inside, but it's the perfect place to pick something up, or to order a delivery from.

Italia Deli

Italia Deli is one of the best places to eat in the Agoura area. It is the perfect place to go during a lunch break, or to pick up a delicious sandwich on the way to the beach.  They also have fresh and one of a kind breads and delicacies to stock up your kitchen. To top it all off, there is a high-energy and friendly environment with local workers. I am a college student, and it is one of the places I look forward to returning to every time I go home!

Viral YouTube Video: "My Tram Experience"

I found the video "My Tram Experience" under the “most viewed” section of the YouTube homepage.  The video was uploaded just 2 days ago (November 27) and it already has over 4 million views. There are even dozens of videos by individuals who are responding to this video or creating parodies.

At the beginning of the video, I started to get a bit bored, and I only continued watching it for the sake of the assignment. As it progressed, it became pretty interesting, even though it still made little sense. The video basically consisted of a nonsensical, extreme, racist rant by a British woman on the tram.  It showed her argument with strangers, along with the reactions of other bystanders. Some people were just frantically texting…one can easily guess what they were texting about.

I feel like the reason why this video attracted so much attention was because it consisted of extreme confrontation.  People seem to be captivated by drama, especially when it is real. Although the vast majority who rated the video had a negative response, the video still gained attention nonetheless.

It is perplexing to think about how videos like this spread so quickly. Millions of people across the world saw this video within a few days, while many videos of greater substance likely went unnoticed in comparison. It says a lot about what people are interested in viewing these days, whether they would readily admit it or not.

This video also reminded me of the type of instant, random fame that we talked about in class a few weeks ago.  This woman who was otherwise unknown to the public just 2 days ago was viewed by millions of individuals, despite any lack of merit.  The constant viral nature of content on the Internet creates temporary pseudo-celebrities that would otherwise never exist. I think this contributes to our recent shortage in attention spans, and ultimately to our overvaluation of content that contains little or no substance.

Flipped

Just several months ago, the United States government was avid about helping protestors stand up to oppressive regimes across the world. Our pro-democratic government was in favor of supporting movements that would mean the spread of democracy.

It is interesting, then, to imagine how a government that supports non-violent protest in another country would react to non-violent protest in its own. It is not necessary to "imagine", however, since we can see this scenario for ourselves.

Since the beginning of the Occupy Wall Street Movement, there have been reports of unnecessary force used by police officers against protestors in New York City. As the movement spread across the country to other cities and to college campuses, this brute police force spread along with it. This very use of force is congruous with the type of brute force we saw in Egypt and other countries, except this time our government is not fighting it. On the contrary, they are the ones endorsing it.

There have been multiples reports of police using violent force against protesting students at various college campuses. A recent pepper spraying incident at UC Davis has escalated into a national debate. As the article UC Davis' pepper spray fuels national debate, growing protests describes, U.S. officers are now the ones using violent force, and our protestors are receiving help, even from...Egypt.

"Lt. John Pike's pepper spray canister has fueled the controversy into a growing encampment and spurred plans for a general strike Monday with sympathizers streaming in from across the state. There is now a geodesic dome and nearly 100 tents, donated from as far away as Egypt -- with more on the way."


This incident raises many questions about our government and its actual ideals about democracy. Astute individuals may have questioned the government's real motives as they supported protestors across the world, and I think now even more people can be skeptical of the government's motivations. Certainly it is understandable that a government would react differently to this type of situation in their own country, but if our leaders are really pro-democracy, they should be listening to the protestors instead of beating and pepper-spraying them. 

An Entrepreneur Working From the Bottom Up

When thinking about the problems and complexities of our economy today, it is interesting to take a look at businessmen in less developed countries in order to see their views about business, given the context of a relatively blank slate, where the possibilities are more open.

The landscape of our own economy is somewhat different because a certain system is already set in place. This system thrives on a particular model of hyper competition and consumption, and since our current economy has been in the making for several generations, it is sometimes harder to fathom major change.  Although entrepreneurs and consumers are aware of the perils of our current system, our willingness to trade in our current lifestyle is another story.

For these reasons, it is refreshing to hear business ideals from an entrepreneur in a country where such a defined "system" is not necessarily set in place. This article Turning Rwanda's rivers into renewable energy gives the reader a glimpse of this unique perspective.

"And how would he describe a good business person?

"When people look at businessmen, they look at money, but I think money is not what makes the person," he said.

"A business, it's working with the people. It's making life easier for others. A good businessman is the one who looks at his neighbours, at his countrymen, at the world," he explained.

"It would be meaningless if I were rich and I'm surrounded by poor people. A good businessman is one who looks first on others before he looks after himself.'"

"Gregory Tayi says that he was forced into business"

Perhaps when trying to find solutions and figure out our own economic ideals, it is necessary to mentally remove ourselves as much as possible from the paradigm that we are used to. If we take a step back and imagine how we would envision an economy starting more or less from scratch, we may be closer to figuring out where we should be, and where we need to start heading.

Flickr

I used the tag feature on Flickr to search for the theme “occupy”. This led me to photograph collection of the Occupy Movement in Eugene, Oregon.  There was a wide variety of images that provided a well-rounded and honest portrayel of the ongoing event.

In one respect, I think that this type of photograph collection tells a story very effectively. I was able to view all aspects of the event, from images of individuals to those of groups, and from behind the scenes preparation to the full-fledged rallies.  I think that this is a major strength because viewers are able to get a feeling of what it would really be like to be at the event, including the parts that are good, bad, and merely mundane.

One possible weakness to this type of photograph collection could be that viewers may not be able to come to an overall consensus of what a given event was like. I already knew a good deal about the Occupy movements, so it was not too hard for me to fill in the blanks and to understand this collection. It may be easier in some cases to understand an event if particular photographs are skillfully selected for viewers.

Overall, I think that Flickr provides a unique and beneficial way to view and share events.  Instead of glorifying an event by only sharing the best photographs and high points, I think there is something very valuable about showing all of the moments in between. The transparancy of this type of album does not cause the viewer to beg any questions or distrust any possible motivations.  This allows an honest and accurate portrayel of events, which should be a main expectation for journalists.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sierralupe/6328822719/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sierralupe/6329600512/in/photostream/lightbox/

Following Mississippi's Initiative 26 on Twitter

It was interesting to see the progression of “tweets” that surrounded the Mississippi initiative that would declare, according to the Mississippi Constitution, that life begins at the moment of fertilization.

If this amendment were passed, it is clear that it would have major implications for subsequent abortion laws.  Furthermore, it seems like this type of legislation would open many doors for the type of issues that the government can regulate.

This being said, there were heated tweets from both sides.  Before the night of the election, it seemed that most comments were being made by people who opposed the initiative. This makes sense, considering that issues usually provoke the most reaction from opponents. 

On the night of the election, it seemed that most of the comments were objective, just stating the fact that the initiative did not pass. This stream of tweets appeared for the most part more coherent than some of the others I had observed in previous days.

After the election, there were many tweets from elated individuals who did not want the initiative to pass, and others, who had supported the initiative, tweeted to the effect that they will not give up.

Watching an aspect of the election unfold via twitter offered an interesting perspective.  It is not that common to see such a live stream of opinions about a current topic. It differed from watching the news because different opinions could be seen, without any need for objectivity or censorship.  This creates a different understanding of issues: It is not just about the prospects and the results, but also about how common people feel about them and react.   

A Bittersweet Experience with Talk Radio

After several long attempts to get on talk radio, and some desperate last shots right before the deadline, I have decided to stop and to reflect about the experience I had, even though I did not attain my goal of getting on the air.

Adapting to the climate of talk radio was definitely a struggle for me at the start.  I have never been a talk radio listener, and the process took some getting used to.  Even though in ways I feel like I have failed to reach my ultimate goal of getting on the air, I also feel that I learned a lot through the course of the assignment.  I definitely came a long way from where I started out a week ago.

During my first attempt at listening to a news/talk show, I struggled to even find a station that I could work with.  Using iHeartRadio, I browsed a variety of news stations, but I struggled to find conversations that I could understand, let alone contribute to.  Topics ranged from specific economic news to sports, both of which I lack up-to-date knowledge about.

As the days progressed, I began to look at radio schedules ahead of time so that I would be sure to listen to conversations from their start. This helped tremendously, and I began to become engaged in conversations that I could actually follow.  Even so, the whole concept of calling in did not come naturally to me. I would not realize that something a host said was even provocative enough to warrant a call. All of a sudden, there would be a caller on the line agreeing with the host, and I would realize time and again that I missed out on a shot.

Although it felt forced, I eventually began to dial into shows, as I became more acquainted with the topics being discussed. Having listened even more extensively to the radio over the past two days, I realized that almost everyone was talking about general economic turmoil, the Herman Cain scandal, and today, the conviction of Michael Jackson’s doctor. I sat for hours on end listening to KTLK-AM, a Los Angeles radio station that has a variety of progressive hosts.

I got through to a screener one time while listening to the Randi Rhodes show on KTLK. The conversation was about Herman Cain, so I said that I wanted to comment about the importance of electing presidential candidates who are trustworthy.  Apart from his allegations of sexual harrassment, I felt that the way he avoided questions showed that he was not transparant enough to be trusted with any topic. I did not end up on the air, however, and this was the closest I came.

Although I had one goal in mind while doing this project, I do still feel like I had minor victories throughout.  In the course of about a week, I became much more familiar with current events. Although I think that hosts should have a more diverse scope of topics so that they are not always repeating themselves and each other, I feel like I got a much more in-depth understanding of several issues than I would have if I were browsing a newspaper or website.  I also learned basic things about talk radio, and how it is set up, and I feel much more inclined to listen in the future.  

Wikipedia

It took me awhile to figure out which Wikipedia articles I could successfully contribute to.   I thought I would have no problem, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that no matter how much I may think I know about certain things, it is another thing to be able to produce facts about those things that are completely authoritatve, accurate, and objective.

At first, I was trying to make a big-league contribution by thinking I could edit an article about Gandhi.  I have been acquiring an in-depth analysis of Gandhi’s life in another one of my classes, so I thought that I might be able to contribute something to the article. I soon realized that the article was “locked” and that I didn’t have the authority to edit the post. (Looking back, that’s not too much of a surprise.) 

I finally decided to contribute to an entry about my high school.  Agoura High School had an entry that lacked much up-to-date information. I used a profile of the high school that I found online to round out the article a bit. This also made me realize that even though I went to Agoura High, I needed to find information that was precise and objective before I could write about it. Relying only on my own experiences would cause me to write with bias, perhaps featuring certain aspects of the school, while ignoring others.

I also contributed to an article about a music festival that I attended in San Francisco this past summer called Outside Lands. The existing entry did not include much information about the various aspects of the festival, so I added some more information to the article.

I really enjoyed this assignment because it is really cool to see something you wrote show up instantly, especially on a page that other people are likely to read.  I also enjoyed figuring out how to create different sections by looking at the code used in different parts of the articles.  Overall, it was a really good experience, and it reinforced my sense of wanting to write in the future.

"Talk Radio"

Eric Bogosian portrays callers as some of the most extreme, and some of the most low-life people out there.  His character, Barry Champlain, is an abrasive talk show host who provokes angry messages from his callers.  By creating a landscape of callers that include drug addicts, racists, and indolent invididuals, Bogosian is commenting about his real view of society, and the type of people who call into radio shows. 

I often feel like people who call into talk radio shows do not know much about the topic they are calling about, but Bogosian definitely takes this critique to the next level.  He does not only portray callers as being unintelligent, but he also portrays them as ill-intentioned.  He ends up depicting the talk radio conversation as a hostile interaction between angry callers and an even angrier host.

This angry host, Barry Champlain, has a ton of nasty things to say about his callers, but he ultimately ends up hating himself as well.  He is, after all, a major part of this talk radio culture that he condemns.

When I listen to talk radio, I sometimes find that there are people who have very intelligent things to say.  As I become a more critical consumer of information, I realize that radio shows may actually go out of their way to choose callers who are off-the-wall and in ways “unintelligent”.  As we have said in class before, radio shows are seeking to make profits, and seething conversations, no matter how mindless, seem to be a means to this goal.

What Talk Shows Are Saying About Occupy Wall Street

I listened to two talk radio conversations that both supported the reasons behind the Occupy Wall Street Movement. 

One conversation was from Fox News Radio, but it mainly featured the voice of the caller, a self-proclaimed “average-joe”.  At first, as with many caller conversations, the radio host interrupted with questions, trying to challenge what the caller was trying to say.  In the end, however, they ended up being more or less on the same page, and the host ends up sincerely thanking the caller for his contribution to the show. In their conversation, they talked about the importance of average citizens being able to share a dialogue that is taken seriously, instead of every decision being battled out by Democrats and Republicans in Congress.

Radio Fox News

The second conversation I listened to was between two authors, who had a similar take of the situation, but they got into a lot more details about underlying problems of the economy, and the types of measures that should be taken to address fundamental change. This conversation was much more thought-provoking because it provided real analysis and possible approaches to reacting to the struggling economy, making the former conversation seem like more of a rant. A journalist/author who is participating in the conversation also focuses more on positive aspects of protesters rather than dwelling angrily on negative aspects of the government. She refers to individuals in New York who are holding up signs that say "I Care About You", and others stopping her on the street and saying " I love you". She describes this as a strange time in the city, but it is in ways more inspiring to hear this view of the situation.

"Conversations With Great Minds"

"Stimulating" Talk Radio

The fact of the matter is that it is not John Ziegler’s job to be responsible, or nuanced, or to think about whether his on-air comments are productive or dangerous, or cogent, or even defensible. That is not to say that the host would not defend his “we’re better”—strenuously—or that he does not believe it’s true. It is to say that he has exactly one on-air job, and that is to be stimulating.

-David Foster Wallace

I find it disconcerting that being stimulating for the mere sake of attracting attention and making money is the primary goal of a radio station.  These hosts do whatever they can to provoke their listeners, despite the implications their words may have.

Hosts do not seem to be too concerned with being factual or careful about what they are saying.  I understand that they are in a slightly different industry from journalism, but not all listeners differentiate these two fields in their minds. People often believe the information they hear without being too critical, and as a result I think that many people are being misinformed.

I know that these radio stations are largely designed to be entertaining, but I think that the line becomes blurry when entertaining commentary is being passed off as factual news. As I mentioned earlier, my mom and brother are both frequent listeners of KFI. What I did not mention is that they are both very much liberal, and I still don’t understand fully why they listen to Dr. Laura and John Ziegler.  It must be because these programs are “stimulating”, but what good is this actually doing for the public?

John Ziegler and Other Hosts on KFI

I have never been one to enjoy talk radio. Perhaps I should begin to navigate my interest toward more serious radio stations, but the content I have heard on many talk radio shows makes me skeptical whether this would even be beneficial.

I have heard bits and pieces of several of the shows on KFI because my mom and brother have always been avid listeners. The line “KFI AM-640, Los Angeles-More Stimulating Talk Radio” resonates in my memory, and I instantly recognized it in the article.

David Foster Wallace describes how John Ziegler is very passionate on the air, proclaiming his opinions loud and clear, even if he disguises them as “the analysis of the facts”. Since the only talk radio show hosts I have really listened to are also on KFI, they are similar to Ziegler in many respects. They are all very, very passionate and their voice and attitude is much more apparent than the facts they are actually discussing.  I have heard shows from Dr. Laura, George Noory, and Bill Handel. Everything they say is pretty frenzied and off-the-wall, and it sounds like John Ziegler may be very similar. This is not the type of news or entertainment that I would prefer to listen to. 

Reaction to Twitter Co-Founder Biz Stone

I would definitely say that my feelings about Twitter have changed after listening to this interview with the co-founder, Biz Stone. 

I can appreciate Twitter for the fact that it emerged as a result of young individuals experimenting with new methods of communication.  I really liked everything that Stone had to say about the importance of people being able to voice their opinions, whether good or bad, trivial or serious. 

Since Twitter is so prominent and successful, I guess I always assumed it was created by a big business that was only trying to make money, uninterested with the actual power of the product. Stone described the excitement he felt as Twitter grew, humanizing the company in a way. Twitter is not just some faceless corporation without any concern for the implications of its work. 

I knew before that Twitter is being used in big ways to communicate information worldwide, and even to aid in revolutions, but I did not fully appreciate this fact until listening to this interview.  It made me recognize the importance of being able to communicate whatever you want, wherever, and whenever. 

To Tweet or Not To Tweet?

I am still getting used to the idea of using Twitter, and I am honestly not sure if I am ever going to make it a habit.  I am aware that I am probably just not accustomed to the language, the format, and the content, but as an outsider, I do not feel that compelled to find myself as an expert of the Twitter trade.

One thing that bothers me about Twitter is how short posts need to be. I can value the art of being concise, but when this leads to cryptic messages that can only be deciphered by fellow Twitter users, I begin to lose sight of the purpose. When I tried posting something that went over 140 characters, Twitter told me to "be more clever".  Sure, I can dig your character limit, but I do not think that cutting down on words or letters exactly equates to cleverness.

Although I am currently perplexed by Twitter, I am not giving up on it altogether. There must be a reason why it is a huge phenomenon, and maybe I will eventually catch on. Perhaps I will revisit it when I have a personal urge to Tweet instead of feeling like I have to for an assignment. Until then, I am guessing my Twitter activity may remain at 10 tweets and 1 follower.

Double-edged Commenting

I think that individuals’ motivations for “reciprocity” commenting may often be self-absorbed, but not for the exact reasons that Ito describes.  Ito illustrates through the dialogue of two teens that people comment on Facebook and Myspace so that people will then click on their own page, comment, and make them appear more “popular”.

Often when I see a lot of people commenting on a link, picture, or status, I think they are trying to draw attention to themselves, but in a less blatant way.  I think they are interested in becoming part of something that has created a lot of buzz.  Even if a post has nothing to do with someone, by liking it or commenting on it, I think that he/she then feels partial ownership of the overall conversation.

The overall nature of social networking sites is perplexing.  It is hard to define the motivations of people as they comment to friends and aquaintences, and it is even more thought-provoking because most of us participate in this type of behavior. 

Perhaps we don’t want to admit the motives behind our online behavior, or maybe some do not even know the deeper reasons behind why they comment.  The important thing to recognize is that there probably are deeper reasons, and online conversations should be taken as more complex than they actually appear.

Letter To The Editor Published!

The letter that I wrote to my local newspaper was published last Thursday. I was excited and surprised to find out that it was published because the newspaper didn't actually tell me themselves...

A former teacher of mine actually posted the link to the newspaper on my Facebook wall, saying "Well done", "You make me proud", etc.  It was cool finding out in this way, especially because my article was about my high school, so I knew that it was a topic that was both personal to me and to my teacher who was writing to me.

Although the thought of having people I know read my letter originally made me nervous, I ended up being happy to hear that people actually read what I had to say and that they actually cared.

It was interesting to me that the newspaper never told me they were publishing my letter. Maybe it was a mistake, or maybe it just isn't a part of their protocol.  It would be kind of cool though, had I been home, to just open up the newspaper and find out that way whether I had been published. Perhaps that is the "old-fashioned" delight they are trying to preserve.

The Acorn: Letter To The Editor

Social Networks vs. General Blogs

As I posted comments this week on Facebook and online stories, I noticed a big difference between the types of conversations I became involved in.  There were distinct differences between my use of Facebook and other networks, from the content of topics to the type of language used.  

First, I commented on a story about the Occupy Wall Street protests.  I found myself using formal language; similar to the way I would try to write for an academic paper.  I think I felt less comfortable just being myself since I did not find myself particularly close to the topic.  I had to rely on the information I could gather from articles, and the type of jargon you hear in the news. I feel like the comment I made sort of became lost in the sea of comments on the topic, not being shot down, but not causing much revolution either.

The next conversation I commented on was about Amanda Knox being set free.  I stumbled upon a very heated debate, and tried to chime in with my own opinion. It was interesting to see how passionate people would become during these conversations.  I found it to be a good opportunity for people to talk about issues that they may not be able to discuss by other means.

The third story I commented on, which was on the lighter side, was about the Red Hot Chili Peppers and their return to the road.  This conversation was not as heated as the previous two, but it was still cool to be able to talk about a general topic with a group of people that have similar interests.  You can hear different perspectives about topics that you didn’t even realize had so many sides.

On Facebook, I posted two comments to friends, and one to a former teacher.  My language in all of these comments was informal and perhaps more indicative of my personality.  As I commented, I realized that everything I talk about or read about on Facebook is more about personal relationships and identities.  It’s not that what I talk about on Facebook is unimportant, but it is generally only topics that directly affect me in some way.

Blogging on news and entertainment is great because you can talk about general topics and it doesn’t even matter who you are talking with.  At least for me, Facebook is a place where the person you are talking to can at times can be more relevant than what you are talking about.  One is not better or worse than the other, it is just two different types of conversation. 

Personally, I find myself using Facebook much more than other communication sites.  I definitely want to become more involved though in general discussions about news and different topics of interest.  It allows you to get into conversations that you may not typically have on Facebook or anywhere else.  

Reality Vs. Facebook

As I was walking this morning, it was raining and there were leaves everywhere, and I realized how nice it all was.  At first though, instead of deciding to enjoy the moment, I had been slightly disappointed that I didn’t have a camera to capture it or that I may not experience another morning like this.

This made me think about the fact that people these days feel an overwhelming need to validate every experience they have by somehow reproducing it or sharing it with others.  After talking in class about the effects of the Internet and Facebook, it is clear that the culture of Facebook dramatically heightens this absurd need.

It can be seen with every aspect of Facebook. Did this still really happen if I don’t make it my Facebook status? If I don’t put this picture on Facebook, what do I even do with it? Am I really friends with someone if we’re not Facebook friends? All of these questions sound ridiculous, yet I bet a lot of people can say they have pondered them to some extent, whether seriously or satirically.

Unfortunately, I cannot say I am just a witness to the Facebook craze, and that I too am fully immersed in it.  As all of these ideas about the Internet’s effects were flowing through my head, they were accompanied by sudden, trivial thoughts about none other than…Facebook.  I walked past two people running, had a funny thought and decided: I should totally write on my friend’s wall about this.  Later, out of nowhere, I remembered having a good conversation with someone the previous night, and I thought to myself: Are we friends on Facebook? I should add him when I get home.  I immediately realized how ridiculous these thoughts were given my simultaneous critique of Facebook, but perhaps that just further proves my point about how much it affects our thought processes.

There is no way to really reverse the impact that Facebook has had on us.  One could say the damage has already been done.  Perhaps the best we can do is to reflect every once in a while and realize how absurd the microcosm of Facebook can be.  It is important to prioritize our real lives over our virtual lives, and to feel that our real experiences are more legitimate than our online reproduction of them, not the other way around.  People can benefit from trying to enjoy the moment they are in, instead of thinking about how they can talk about it on Facebook later.

Letter To The Editor: How Geography Determines Stories

The trial and execution of Troy Davis captivated the attention of people all across the country, and has led to articles and editorials in national and local newspapers from coast to coast. Yet the local newspaper of Savannah, Georgia, the place in which Troy Davis’ alleged crime took place, has paid little to no attention to the recent developments of this story.  It is a newspaper’s responsibility to provide the public with important stories, whether or not a given story makes your city or state particularly proud.  Any editorial at all would be better than nothing, no matter what you have to say about the topic.  The important thing is that people are aware of what is going on in their country, and in this case their state.  

I attend a university in a small town in Massachusetts, and even here students and the community were putting together protests and recognizing Troy Davis.  If you search the recent archives of the Los Angeles Times, they have numerous articles analyzing this case.  A similar search of the Savannah Daily News database yields just two links: both of which redirect you to another news site.  This raises a question that goes far beyond the matter of Troy Davis and his execution.  Newspapers need to be discerning and be able to objectively inform the public to enable democracy, not to perpetuate the biases that different parts of the country may possess. 

I became interested in the Troy Davis case when I had to look for a story in my Newswriting class.  I quickly became aware of the attention that people were paying to the Georgia execution case in all different parts of the country.  I found an editorial in The Los Angeles Times about the execution, and was about to respond to it, when I realized I should look at a local newspaper from Georgia and see what their coverage on the case looked like.  

I knew their perspective on the situation may look a bit different than what I have seen in Northampton and Los Angeles, but I was so surprised and annoyed when I found basically no coverage of the story in the local newspaper of Savannah, Georgia. (Savannah is the city in which Davis’ alleged crime took place.) A search led me to only two links, both of which were just hyperlinks to other news sites.  A similar search in The Los Angeles Times provided 72 articles about the case.  I am aware that the LA Times is much bigger than The Savannah Daily News, but it is also on the other side of the country opposed to being in the very town in which the case was concerned.  

This ended up going beyond the Troy Davis case, becoming a discovery of how newspapers throughout the country do in fact have different biases, and this is reflected in the content of their stories.  We always talk about how newspapers must be objective and just present the news, but it is possible to write parts of the truth from various perspectives.  This is what I realized after comparing the two newspapers, and I am more skeptical than ever of the objectivity of the news.

Letter To The Editor: My Hometown's Take on Standardized Testing

In response to the criticism of the STAR testing incentives, as a former Agoura High School student, I will attempt to reveal a student’s perspective on the issue.  First of all, it is important to understand that standardized test results do have an effect on students to an extent.  Most students plan to go to college after they graduate, and if they want to get into a competitive program, the reputation of their high school has an effect on their admission.  Better standardized test scores means a higher API score for their school, meaning that higher reputation.  

As a former student, I am well aware that a big reason why schools do not perform well on these tests is a result of students just not trying.  How else would these incentive programs have caused such dramatic results in such a short time? 

In regards to students with learning disabilities, students are in fact given different levels of the STAR test based on their course levels.  It may not be an accomodation that satisfies all parents, but standardized testing is necessary to evaluate the education that students are receiving in relation to other schools.  Whether we like it or not, we live in a competitive world, and trying to delay that effect on young adults until after they graduate from high school will not likely do them much good. 

I admit the administration may be getting a bit carried away with their incentive efforts, but their motives should not be misunderstood or misrepresented.  Higher standardized testing scores have positive effects on faculty and students alike. 

I chose to write a letter to my local newspaper partly because I thought it would have a better chance of being published.  Not only do I offer a new perspective on the issue, but I am a former student of the high school in question.  The previous people that were featured in The Acorn, which included a parent and the editor of the newspaper, complained about how unfair standardized testing is and how the school is punishing kids who do not do well.  Since I took the California standardized test for many years and witnessed the type of tendencies that go on with other students taking the test, I thought I could offer some information from an insider’s perspective.  I conceded toward the end that my high school may be getting a bit carried away with their incentive programs, but I still think it is important that parents and writers consider the entire scope of a situation and that they do not get so fueled up on a single part of the issue, ignoring the other perspectives and the inevitable decisions that schools must make.

When Should Editors Stop Editing?

Wahl-Jorgensen: Editors see a policy of limited editorial intervention as the only way to ensure an open and honest debate about the varied issues that face citizens of a multicultural society. They are also eager to show that ethical aims of fairness, accuracy and balance underpin the letters pages. (Page 87)

I definitely think it is important that editors do their best to include comments from their readers that are uncensored and in their original form. Yet there is already a subconscious censoring of letters in the process alone of selecting which letters to publish. Editors must search for letters that prove good points, yet which present opposing stances. They must give everyone the opportunity to share their opinion, no matter how mainstream or unorthodox. 

I think there may be some cases in which letters can lead to misleading interpretations of issues if the editor does not format or present them in a careful way.  I am optimistic enough that people can read editorial sections discerningly, but I still do not rule out all together that there may be a time and a place for an editor to intervene. It may not be the ideal situation for an open and organic conversation, but I think that the editor also has a responsibility to keep a constructive conversation going. 

For the most part, I think that editors do a good job of selecting letters that show various perspectives of each issue. Even though readers may immediately agree or disagree with a letter, it is still important that we are constantly faced with information that is varied and representative of everyone out there. Even if someone's opinion isn't going to change our mind, it is important that we recognize the different perspectives out there so we can create a better understanding of the world around us.

Letters To Learn From

I selected one letter from the New York Times, and one from the Los Angeles Times.  They are similar in the respect that they are both clear and rational, while avoiding an overwhelmingly serious tone. 


Letter from the New York Times addressing climate change:
Re “Is It Weird Enough Yet?,” by Thomas L. Friedman (column, Sept. 14):

I agree strongly that “we need to take steps to mitigate climate change — just in case Governor Perry is wrong.”

The French philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal, in what has become known as Pascal’s wager, suggested that even people who did not believe in God should act as if they did, since being wrong could be catastrophic.

I would say to the climate skeptics: If you do not believe in climate change but act as if you did, even if you are right, the result would be a society with clean, sustainable jobs, less dependence on Mideast oil and healthier lives. But if you are wrong and we do not act immediately, the results would be catastrophic.

PHILLIP GOTTSCHALK
Montville, N.J., Sept. 14, 2011

I liked this letter because the writer is very rational in the sense that he addresses the idea: What is the worst thing that can happen if we believe in climate change? The letter addresses the two possible outcomes of how we react to the issue of climate change. He makes it clear what is at stake, and his reference to Pascal makes it easy to understand that there is no huge downfall to believing that climate change does in fact exist.  In my opinion, it is hard to argue with any of the points that he makes.

Letter from the Los Angeles Times addressing prescription drugs:
Re "Drugs now deadlier than autos," Sept. 18

It wouldn't be at all surprising to find that the increased abuse of prescription drugs somewhat coincides with pharmaceutical companies increasingly marketing their products directly to consumers.

Though I do not wish to demean the seriousness of the maladies that many of these drugs are intended to treat, the advertisements cause semi-hysterical laughter because the possible risks associated with imbibing these drugs often sound far worse than the conditions they treat. Side effects I've heard include blindness, a sudden drop in blood pressure, suicidal thoughts and death.
Do drug companies want to actually help those in need, or do they simply try to make ever more money?
Lewis Redding

Arcadia

This letter caught my attention because it addresses the harm of prescription drugs rationally while also utilizing some irony and a tinge of dark humor. The writer lets his personality shine through a little bit without being overly radical with his ideas or language. It also caught my attention because the same thought always crosses my mind as I watch commercial after commercial about prescription medicine that cram a long list of side-effects at the very end that seem far worse than what the medicine is treating. It makes you question whether you should just take your chances with what you already have. The writer shows some level of being a critical consumer, as he does not just buy into what the drug companies are trying to market. 

The Relationship Between Journalists and the Public

Journalists stand in a paternalistic relationship to readers: They guide them rather than engage them in conversation. They decide on the legitimate and valuable topics for the agenda based on the estimation of the public’s need to know, but don’t see the necessity for listening to the public. (Page 18) Wahl-Jorgensen

It is really important that there is a two-way relationship between journalists and their readers.  By being able to respond to journalists, readers are empowered to have an active role in their education process.  If people are merely force-fed information, they may become unable to recognize good and relevant stories for themselves.  It is also important for readers to be able to voice their opinions toward journalistic work because it will motivate writers to uphold a high level of effort with their research and stories.  With a higher level of integrity and substance, journalistic pieces can better benefit everyone involved.  The western world prides itself on being progressive and democratic, and allowing the average public to participate and share a voice in journalism is a way of valuing this democratic ideal.

Making news became commercially viable through the selling of audiences to advertisers, instead of newspapers to partisan audiences…The new centrality of advertising income also meant that owners and editors were compelled to abandon controversial, partisan material from their reports, and instead aimed to please as many advertisers and consumers as they possibly could by printing ostensibly “neutral” content and proclaiming their political independence.(Page 38) Wahl-Jorgensen

When viewing the relationship between news and advertising, it is hard to strike a fair balance between the two.  Ideally, journalists would be able to write about ideas that they truly believe in, never compromising their beliefs for the sake of making money.  It is tricky, however, seeing how revenue is the only way that newspapers can get by and continue to have the resources to produce more news. Not to mention we live in a world where making a profit is one of the biggest motivators behind any work we do. 

On the other hand, I think it may be good in a way that newspapers are objective in presenting the news.  Readers should not be forced to think a certain way about a matter, and by reading just about the facts of an event, people can hopefully draw their own conclusions and form their own meaning.  There are enough private magazines and other sources of information out there, that if people want to read a particular viewpoint, they can find it.  Likewise, if a journalist is very opinionated and wants to write about a certain topic or from a certain political perspective, I have no doubt that they can find a place to write, along with people willing to read what they have to say.