The fake calm during the storm or life in America

Helen praises and recognizes journalists that she admires, in the last chapter. It's a long list of people, that I want to research and learn more about. I feel lucky that I was able to see and listen to Seymour Hersh speak at the beginning of this quarter. Hersh is an example of a watchdog journalist.
The deeper I get into journalism, the more I realize how little I know.
Helen's epilogue shows very well how she is upset with the current state of journalism and feels that younger journalists have no sense of history, and that may be true. But sometimes I feel that the older generation is living in the seventies or a different time. They are trying to use old solutions to new problems. It also seems that we are potentially repeating history. The Iraq war is embarrassingly similar to Vietnam. And who's fault is that? The younger generation or the older? The younger for not learning history? Or the Older for not learning from history? It seems to me that everyone, young or old, is potentially at fault. Except for the future generations who will have to live with the decisions we make. Journalists have the duty to keep people informed so they can be free.
I like the quotation from Abe Lincoln at the end of Thomas's book: "Let the people know the facts and the country will be safe."

Poodle or Pitbull?

In chapter nine, Helen finally starts to make some important points about the current state of journalism. I agree with her when she says at the end of chapter nine, that journalists could have prevented the U.S. from going to war in Iraq, if they had only put the spotlight on George Bush's plans to go to war from the beginning. I liked the quote she got from Ted Stannard, "When watchdogs, bird dogs, and bulldogs morph into lapdogs, lazydogs, or yellow dogs, the nation is in trouble." The lack of watchdog journalism gave the people in power a free pass to go to war. Now that this crisis has happened, many journalists are waking up from their slumber and they are starting to reapply the pressure. There still needs to be more though.

In chapter ten, she continues talking about Iraq but kind of veers off the main topic of watchdog journalism once again. She talks about the dangers journalists face when they are out in the field reporting combat situations. In Iraq journalists are often the target of attack. Unlike Vietnam, where a journalism badge could grant a reporter immunity or at least save their life. The journalist who risk their lives to keep the public informed are very courageous. And should be commended for what they have done.

American people's apathy reflects my own

Chapter 8 continues on the same topic as Chapter 7. Thomas discusses in detail the FCC and continues to talk about the powerful influence corporations have on the media. The FCC is a very powerful agency. The FCC has the power to shut people down and censor what they say. And when corporations influnece the FCC, who knows what citizens will be allowed or not allowed to listen to. I think Thomas asks some very important questions at the end of the chapter. "...Where are the American people today in demanding diverse ownership of the airwaves? And where is Congress when they should be stopping the overreach of the giant broadcasting conglomerates?" I lost total faith in the President a while ago, but just recently I have also lost faith in Congress with the passing of the new war funding bill. It feels like there is no one in power who is really representing the voice of the American people. Journalists need to inform the American people about this so they can be a free and self governing people. Or say hello to "1984." I just recently watched All the Presidents Men and I kept on having Deja vu moments. It's crazy how the political atmosphere during the Nixon era is hauntingly similar to the current atmosphere.

"Newspapers are a Business, too" and the business is owned by just a few

I think Chapter 7 hits upon one of the biggest issues of modern news. News(written, radio, and TV) is owned by just a few companies, and they are buying more. The Oregonian for example is owned by Newhouse News Service, which owns 26 different newspapers around the country, and Newhouse is based in Washington, DC. The news on TV is pretty much a joke, and most of it is owned by three companies. The consolidation of media, in my opinion, is a big threat to this country. If independent and privately owned newspapers and other news sources don't fight to be their own thing and fight for their rights, then soon we will be hearing just what big companies want us to hear. It will become difficult to hear opposing viewpoints.
But now that I think about it, it is difficult to do anything nowadays without money and you need a lot of it. It seems like you can seek and report the truth all you want but Bill O'Reilly is going to have a bigger audience. It is very unfair and unbalanced battle and it almost looks impossible. I think it needs to be fought, though.

Hail to Snitches and Bitches and the Journalists that protect them.

I don't really believe in what my title suggests. I just thought it sounded good. I believe when someone sees an injustice or something wrong going on that they should tell someone about it. Not speaking up about it would be the greater evil. I also am aware that many of the people in these situations are afraid of losing there job or even going to jail. That is why they don't tell anyone in the first place. I think a journalist should respect these individuals wishes to be anonymous. I think this whole issue about privacy, however, reveals how convoluted our modern society really is. It really shows how much power the government and corporations have. Even though Jeffrey Wigand followed his conscience and disclosed information on how executives of tobacco companies knew that tobacco was harmful, he was fired from his job and his wife divorced him. Many people who do the right thing get thrown in jail. I agree with Thomas when she wrote, "Gratitude comes later-sometimes too late." This reminds me of Fast Food Nation and how there is crap in hamburgers. How many people have known about this and been afraid to say anything? What else is going on? The Government and corporations have a lot of power. A journalist's duty is to seek out and report the truth. Journalists should encourage others to speak out the truth too, so we can keep the citizns informed about things they should know about. When a person sticks their neck out for the truth, a journalist should do the same to protect them. So the title should be hail to the snitches but not the bitches, because the bitches are doing what they are told and are too afraid to stick their necks out.

Want to learn how to spin the news? Watch Bill O'Reilly

This past weekend, I had the pleasure of watching "Outfoxed." I decided to watch "O'Reilly Factor" before I put in "Outfoxed" and also to see what all the "hoo-ha" was about. I never watched O'Reilly before. I was thinking to myself, "How bad can this show really be?" I gotta say this guy really upsets me. It was disturbing how blatantly biased it was. I always thought the "Colbert Report" was funny, but now I see that Colbert is a parody of O'Reilly. I though the "colbert report was outlandish and an exaggeration, but sadly it is not. O'Reilly is a conceited, self-promoting, lying spinner of the news. It's disturbing how O'Reilly lies and fabricates news. It amazes me that people actually watch this show. This show should be pulled from TV for it's poor quality.
Coincidentally, Chapter 5 of Thomas's memoirs(or should I say "hard-hitting manifesto on the precipitous decline" of modern day journalism)just happens to be called "Spinning the News." This old fox ambles on about the news-managing presidents of the last 50 years. I think it is to be expected that presidents and other people in power are going to attempt to spin the news. I don't think they should, but they're bound to do it. When somebody talks bad about the president, with all that power,of course he is going to try to shut those people up. But some presidents, especially George W. Bush, have crossed the line-big time. It seems to me that Fox news and other news outlets are appendages of the Bush administration. I think Thomas is right when she says that Bush has misled and deceived the country. Just because I agree with her on one point doesn't mean I have to like her, though. She is a better journalist than Bill O'Shady(if he can even be called a journalist).

"an unwanted appendage, like a cocklebur that attaches to your pants leg"Helen's saga continues

Thomas continues on to recount her memories of the "good ol' days." In this chapter, she describes the ignoble and the few noble deeds of the many press secretaries she dealt with. Throughout the chapter Thomas does not hesitate to paint herself as a witty journalist that was feared and respected by all. She loves to mention her trip to China with Nixon. She has mentioned this trip at least twice. Thomas's ego seems to inflate a little bit when President Reagan asks about what she is thinking. There are a lot of little interesting pieces of trivia and history in this chapter and it is interesting to find out about these things. However, what does this really have to do about the "waning press corps"? "Watchdogs" is more of a recollection of Thomas's experiences, accomplishments, and thoughts. The title could be changed to The Life and Times of Helen Thomas. I hope so far she is just setting the scene, and as the book progresses that she will begin talking more about how the press corps has failed the public.
This chapter shows how hard it is for a journalist to get the truth when there are presidents, press secretaries, and others lying to them. But that's just an excuse. It is the journalist's job to dig deep and verify information. It is easy to get bigheaded though. I am writing little stories for a community college newspaper and here I am ripping on an experienced journalist. If Thomas ever read my stories, I wonder what she would think? Anyways, she probably won't read them because I am not the president.

Reminiscing old times: ramblings of an old journalist

Chapter three was a fun and interesting read, but it did feel disconnected from the main theme of the book. Thomas spends the entire chapter recollecting the "good old days." I think she could of saved this chapter for her biography or her memoirs. In the last two paragraphs of the chapter she attempts to circle back to the main theme. She says that journalism is a way of life and I assume she is using her life as an example of this.
She ends saying she hopes younger journalists recognize the important role of journalism in democracy. Thomas doesn't make it too clear as to what that role is. Unless that role is to get close to the president.
Thomas mentions "legwork" at the beginning of the chapter. I think this "legwork" she mentions should have been emphasized more. You don't always need to talk to the president to get the real story. Actually, a president is more likely to "spin" the story to maintain his image. If journalists spends all their time trying to get close to the president it is likely they will miss the real story. Journalists aren't groupies or at least they shouldn't be.

She looks kind of scary.

Journalists look like parasites in the movies & more on "Watchdogs of Democracy"

In Chapter 2, Helen Thomas shifts from showing the misdeeds of journalists to listing off the times journalists have helped bring about social justice and attention on corruption in government leadership. I found it interesting how she wrote about the change in privacy a public official was allowed. She said that during JFK's administration there had been a "golden rule": that private lives of high-ranking leadership such as the president was off-limits.(23) Obviously that has changed as Thomas points out and as we can see with the Clinton & Lewinsky affair.
It seems to me alot of people perceive journalists as scavengers looking for fresh meat. When journalists get the scent of a scandal or corruption they come flocking. At least that is how the movies and TV depict journalists. I think the big scandalous stories are important and do need to be reported on, but journalists should also be digging deeper and trying to find the real truth. This should be their number one goal in order to inform the people about real issues and concerns that actually affect them. For example, a journalist writes a story about a suicide and talks about the blood and horror. It may be a good story but how does it help or inform. It does inform the people of the act. But what if there are a rash of suicides due to depression in the area. This would be the deeper, more important story to report.
If high officials were doing something extremely illegal or corrupt they could throw many journalists off by putting up a smokescreen, something that distracts the journalists from the important stuff going on. I think this happens a lot actually.
This is why it is important for a journalists to look deep and dedicate themselves to report the important truth and not just the bones thrown to them by the politicians and corporations in power.

Journalism-A Most Honorable Profession-Or is it? Helen Thomas's "Watchdogs of Democracy"

In the first chapter of her book, Helen Thomas points out the many instances throughout history where journalists have lied, plagiarized, and tarnished the image and credibility of journalism. Yet Thomas maintains that Journalism is an honorable profession. The three main principles of the code of ethics: Seeking truth and reporting it, Minimizing harm, and Acting independently are high ideals. I believe there is honor in following these principles. When journalists follow these standards, journalism is a very honorable profession. However, when journalists lie, fabricate stories, or hide the truth for money, how hideous their acts appear next to the code of ethics they have disregarded.
On Wed. I went and saw Seymour Hersh speak. Coincidentally, he spoke on the same topic. Hersh said that early on American journalism failed in reporting the truth about the war on terror and George W. Bush, but he feels that the improvement of our journalism is the one way we can hold leadership to a higher standard. Hersh said that he felt that by being a journalist he has served the country as much as someone in the military.
It is a difficult task to seek the truth and report it. The truth is a powerful thing. It can cause fear, shame, even death. It can also bring happiness,pride, and it can even save someone's life.It is inspiring to know that by seeking the truth and reporting it honestly a journalist can help society be free.
One time when my dad was punishing me for some reason, he said,"You can get a thousand Atta-boys. But one Aw-shit wipes them all out."
They same goes for journalists. One little fabrication can ruin a journalist's credibility in the eye of the public. It doesn't matter how much the journalist changes; once the public loses their trust in someone it is gone forever. Bye-bye.

Do the ends justify the means? Deception in Journalism

In the movie Capote, Truman Capote researches the killing of a family in a small town in Kansas. The police arrest two men, who are placed on death row. Capote interviews one of the men very intensely and becomes very close to him. Capote gains the confidence of the inmate. Capote feels that it is necessary for him to lie to the man to get the story.
At one point in the movie, Capote reads from the book he started writing to a large audience of peple, and says that the book will be called In Cold Blood. The inmate finds out what the book will be titled and becomes upset with Capote. Capote tells the man that whoever relayed the message must have been lying because he would never title the book in such a way as to make the inmate look like a cold-blooded murderer. In fact, capote tells the man he hadn't even started writing the book yet. Capote felt he had to do this to keep the man's trust. But was this ethical?
I think it wasn't ethical for Capote to lie to this man. I think Capote should have attempted being more honest with the inmate. If he wasn't able to get the story that way he probably should have gave up on it, instead of taking advantage of the man. If a journalist was actually in that situation it would be a difficult decision to make.
I think there are instances where deceptive means may be the only option in obtaining a story and it wouldn't be unethical to use them. I heard about a man who painted himslf black to explore racial injustice. He was deceiving people, but I think it was for a good purpose. He could have gone about it differently, but the results would have been different.
There isn't a clear cut answere to deception. It kind of falls in a moral gray area. I think generally deception is unethical and shouldn't be used, but there are some instances where it should be used and may be ethical.

"In the Stent Era, Heart Bypasses Get a New Look" Blogs 5,6&7

It was dificult for me to find an article that needed improvement. Most of the stories I read were hard news stories written in inverted-pyramid style like the unusual one I mention in the previous blog. One article that I found in The New York Times called "In the Stent Era, Heart Bypasses Get a New Look" could possibly be improved. Overall, I would have to say that the article was well-written. The focus was clear and concise, except for a few occasions in the middle where the author seems to stray. Every time the author begins to stray, though, he ties it back to the main point. The one thing that I might have changed is to take the example of the patient in the latter half of the story and move it closer to the beginning. It could be moved to the very beginning. The story could have been written more in narrative style, instead of beginning with a question. I know Ms. Kopinski frowns on starting a story that way. The question restates the headline. It may be kind of redundant. The story is also on the long side. Many readers might not commit to reading the entire story, but that might just be my laziness speaking. I had to force myself to read it from start to finish. Otherwise, it is a good story.

"Bus Runs Over Man Who Is Chasing It" Random Blog

The article Bus Runs Over Man Who Is Chasing It is a good example of inverted-pyramid style. I know it doesn't fulfill the assignment requirements but I just wanted to mention it anyway.

The Push for Natural Birth "BLOGS 3 & 4"

The article Oregon moms feel the push for natural birth in the Feb. 11,2007 editon of the Oregonian was not concise or clear. The deckhead makes a strong focus but the author doesn't really follow up on this. The author comes close but the story seems to wander too much. There are times when the author has some examples that could be used to illustrate her main point but they come too late. The article is also too long. By the time I reached the end it was difficult to remember what the point of the story was. I also felt the ending should have tied back to the begining with a circular kicker.
The story has the potential of being a good story. The ideas are definitely newsworthy. Women are sure to find the topic interesting. The author uses lots of quotes and cites many different studies. The author has done a lot of research; but I think the story has too many ideas. The author tries to do too much.
It could be separated into a couple of different stories to make it more manageable, each with their own focus. The author could change the focus and rearrange the order of the entire story and that may make it more readable. Like I said before, the ending could connect back to the beginning to tie everything together. I think there is too much going on here and it needs to be more focused.

Reading Blog #2

The Oregonian printed a story called "Study links brain area with urge to smoke" on the front page of the Jan. 26, 2007 issue. I believe this is a hard news story since it is timely news and it impacts smokers and people close to smokers.
The story is written in inverted pyramid style. The first paragraph/sentence is a summary lead that tells the who,what and why of the rest of the story. The rest of the story is backup and elaboration supplying context and in-depth information to support the lead.
The Columbian had a story on January 19,2007 called "Local DUI arrests jumped 53% in '06" on the front page. It also is a hard news story. It is hard news because it impacts the drivers of Clark County. In this story the author uses narrative style to describe a policeman pulling over a drunken driver. This goes on for about seven paragraphs before the nut paragraph. I think this can be done with this story since there is a chart showing pertinent information.
The first story gets right to the point. The second one kind of meanders for a little bit before everything comes together. I enjoyed reading the second one more because it was easy for me to visualize the story.

Reading Log #1

In the Oregonian, on January 12, 2007 on the front page, they printed an article called "Man Says Firefighters beat him." I think this story is newsworthy because it has impact. It is important for citizens to know if firefighters and policeman are abusing there power. This article also contains the quality of conflict because there is a different account of what is happening by the firfighters and the man attacked. It is also a timely article since the event happened very recently. This is an article that deserves to be on the front page.

Just in. nanenonen has started a blog.

Hi everyone. I have nothing to say or report on right at the moment. I hope I do soon though. Later.