Week Thirteen: The Penultimate Post!

This week is another two course helping of Journalism Junk, discussing and analysing: -Chapter 13: Online news: journalism's strands coverage (from p. 296)
-Chapter 17: Perils of Defamation (from p. 408)

My 'Journalism Junk' blog has come this far, I can only hope it has been a pleasure for all who have encountered and read it!
My intention was mainly to encourage people to gain an insight into the world of journalism, mediated through my own reflections and opinions, so I hope you got something out of it over these many weeks of Daily Miracle textbook readings!
I do have a bit of a 'theme' running through these postings, so if this were the first time you have visited my blog, I'd strongly recommend checking some previous editions out! And make sure you check out my final post for this subject next week!

Anyway, moving right along now...

J. JONAH JAMESON QUOTE OF THE WEEK:



Peter Parker says: "Spider-Man wasn't trying to attack the city, he was trying to save it. That's slander."

To which Jameson replies: "It is not. I resent that. Slander is spoken. In print, it's libel."

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: ONLINE NEWS (p. 313)

There is a record number for this chapter alone, plus there is another round to come after these! I suggest you settle in and get as comfortable as you can for a long journey!

1. What do media companies need to do in relation to convergence before they can expect their journalists to work in converged newsrooms?

They need to ensure that they aren't trying to force journalists to engage in every style of journalism ever conceived, but rather trying to build up a relationship between those personnel of cross media boundaries. Everyone needs to know their own role and how others work in order to effectively co-operate and establish positive, clear communication, but not necessarily be fully qualified and expect to undertake any duty from television to print and everything in between!

2. What would be the likely outcome if someone who just wanted to work as a print journalist, because they were nervous on television, was told by the company they worked for that they must report for television as well as print?

As I mentioned before, people working in any of these areas need to have a knowledgeable understanding across a wide range of media in order to function in a converged news room, however if someone that worked in print was suddenly made to be on T.V and they didn't have the necessary 'aesthetic' qualities, it would have catastrophic effects for their overall confidence and career development, and it is highly likely the media organisation would suffer due to consumers declining to watch their news, and therefore the loss of key advertising revenue and therefore funding. So, whilst this style of 'convergence' may work in theory, the negative consequences far out way the benefits!

3. Is journalistic convergence just a trendy fad that will run its course then be forgotten about?

I think I’ll let a few small extracts from The Daily Miracle answer this one:

"Convergence is the flavour of the month, but it seems that journalists working for the US media conglomerate [Media General] which was said to be a model for all to follow were not really using it. The fact is that what is really driving cross-platform news reporting - as distinct from converged, or cross-media, ownership - is the web" (p. 299).
"In the current media environment in Australia it is extremely unlikely that newspapers, radio, or television will disappear. They are too profitable in their own right". (p. 299)

4.What would be the long-term outcome in Australia of relaxed cross-media ownership laws?

These are only possible outcomes, nothing 100% certain, however the following could occur:
- Domination by rich, prominent media moguls of all platforms
- Lack of diversity within each form
- Consumers lose faith in all media forms if they are controlled by few organisations providing little diversity
- Advertisers may become disillusioned with converging tactics and may elect not to provide needed funds

In summary, it certainly wouldn't increase media diversity and accuracy!

5. If you had a crystal ball, what would it tell you about the future of radio, television, and the web?

Simply to not be so paranoid about the Internet converging all media and becoming the only medium by which to receive any news. All the contemporary media forms that exist in the present each have a unique purpose, and there is no need to replace them in favour of one form.
And who knows...maybe something even better and more sophisticated may come along?

6. Should the idea of multiskilling be integrated into every course in university journalism studies? Why?

I think that it should definitely be something to consider in the future, as multi-skilled media industries is certainly where the future is heading, and for journalists to have myriad skills across a platform of different media would assist in adapting to the whole issue of 'convergence.' For instance, it should be university students studying journalism pick a major in one particular media format, and also gain extra knowledge on others. It will probably be a highly preferred job credential that employers look for: the multiskilled journalists!

7. Is society getting to a point where life as we know it could not survive without the Internet and web?

I think society is already at that point. I know if Internet savvy people stopped and thought once in a while how much they depend on it for work and social purposes, they would be very surprised about how much they take it for granted. Casing point, as I write these words, the though just occurs to me that I am writing a blog which will be published to the web for anyone in the world to read, and those massive, philosophical thoughts hardly enter the common consciousness. It's just a given now!
Also, imagine getting through the HSC or university without it. I'd say near impossible.
Researching, communicating in terms of social networking and work related uses, online learning tools, emails...there's a lot more to it when you really think about it!
The Internet mediates our whole society; I'd even go as far to say it dictates much of our lives to varying degrees!
Here's a challenge I put to you all: Make a mental note of how many consumer products or advertisements don't include some sort of web address to further your knowledge of their products etc

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: PERILS OF DEFAMATION (p. 431)

All this legal action concerning defamation and suing is certainly a highly complex area of journalism, but it can also be interesting once you get your head around it!
I'm going to attempt that now through answering these three discussion questions:

1. You are a newspaper editor. One of your reporters has made an honest mistake that defamed someone. You publish an apology. The person defamed is not satisfied and wants you to print a full-page feature story promoting her business or she will sue. What will you do?

If further negotiation proves unsuccessful, then I'd have no choice but to take the matter to court. My reasoning for this is that I have no guarantee that the plaintiff won't turn around and sue the newspaper, regardless of whether I fulfil her request. I'd ensure I would not compensate for someone's alleged defamation case due to threat of blackmail.

2. Would you support a 'public figure' defence for the media that would sharply limit the rights of public figures, ranging from premiers to cricketers and rock stars, to take out defamation suits against the media? Why?

No. Because these people are constantly in the public eye, and chances are, they are more likely to be defamed. Limiting their rights to take out defamation suits against the media inhibits their status in society, and would just generate more outrage and more complication with legal action. In addition, it would be a very 'grey area' in defining who is exempt from the laws and who isn't, and this would generate more controversy. For example, is it acceptable for someone such as Andrew Hansen from ABC TV's The Chaser's War on Everything to take out defamation against someone, but not the Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard?







3. You have promised a confidential source that you will not identify her. However, you discover that what she told you is untrue. Your newspaper is sued for defamation. You try to contact the person but she has vanished. Do you reveal her identity in court? Why?

After a considerable attempt has made to contact her and it has been confirmed that the information she gave was false, then it would seem that revealing her would be the best, if only, option. If I couldn't contact her and she has disappeared, then obviously her intentions in providing her information to the media was to somewhat sabotage an individual or company's reputation. Since the reason for it was unknown, I wouldn't feel the need to protect her confidentiality anymore because again, her actions were obviously strategically planned to inflict the most damage possible, and deliberately mislead the public.

JOURNALISM ISSUE ENTRY:

The Chapter about online news particularly interested me this week, especially some of the theories of the future of other media forms, and the powerful, dominant nature of the Internet and all its potential to influence the direction of all media. Convergence seems to be the biggest talking point with the Internet revolution. Traditional ways of receiving news and current affairs is certainly transforming, but like the chapter in The Daily Miracle stresses, they won't be replaced by new media, rather complimented for the purpose of the public furthering their knowledge of any given subject or story which interests them. For example, if they watch an intriguing story on ABC's 7:30 Report, or miss the program they intended to watch, they have the convenience of being able to visit the website, and/or download a 'podcast' or 'vodcast' to their PC to watch at any time!

In my opinion, this is all fantastic news for the future of news, but in this week's blog I'd like to discuss an unexpected 'media centre' which is at the forefront of 'cutting edge' convergence: It is none other than Nintendo's new home console the NINTENDO WII!



This new device could change video gaming forever, with its easy accessibility for all who play it young and old. This audience demographic is inherent in its name, (Wii) meaning its simple and inclusive of all, gamer or non-gamer.

I own one myself, and just by having an active broadband Internet connection and turning it on, you instantly have access to myriad content literally at your fingertips via the Wii-mote, a TV remote like controller which responds via motion as determined by the gamer, and pointing it at the screen and pressing a few buttons:



The type of content you have access to is a digital photo manipulation channel, internet surfing, Wii shop where you can buy 'old-school' games, a news and current affairs channel and regular global weather updates! This is what the interface looks like:



Now, I should point out I am by no means trying to sell this product, it just serves as such a superb example of where media convergence is headed, and again, the power and influence of the web as more and more people become connected and it increasingly becomes INFORMATION ON DEMAND! And then what implications will this have?

Make sure you check Zeejay's Journalism Junk next week for the final post of this university second semester!

What's that? You just can't wait and want a little taster?
It's based around The Daily Miracle's Chapter 16: Ethical journalism: is it an oxymoron?
So if you want to read ahead so we can have a heated debate about what I'm sure will be controversial issues raised, then by all means...I compel you to.
And who knows? You may even want to drop me a comment and offer some constructive criticism on my blog?
Or now am I being just a little TOO ambitious?

Ask A Ninja Question 31 "TechNINlogy"

Week the 12th; Chapter 12: Broadcast journalism: the world's town crier!

I thought I'd jump ahead to Week Twelve's topic of the Journalism Junk because it made for an interesting, informative read. The information it provided was highly valuable for anyone with a passion for broadcast journalism and to all those aspiring to be involved in the industry!
I highly recommend reading the sections that deal with reporting for radio (begins on page 281 of The Daily Miracle) and reporting for television (begins page 288 of The Daily Miracle). Some handy tips 'n tricks to consider!
The first section of the chapter also outlines a history of the various broadcast mediums in Australia with strengths and weaknesses they have had during their evolution into dominant media forms.

Now, without any further ado...



J. JONAH JAMESON QUOTE OF THE WEEK!

[Discussing his son's wedding with his wife over the phone] "Flowers? How much? If you spend any more on this thing, you can pick the daisies off my grave! Get plastic!"

WEEK THE 12th ROUND OF DISCUSSION QUESTIONS (p. 294):

1. Do you think the ABC should be privatised? What impact might this have on broadcast journalism? If you disagree, could the government funding process be made less 'political'?



No, the ABC should not be privatised because as this week's textbook chapter reading indicated, "a poll in 2004 revealed that the ABC was the second most trusted organisation in Australia. The most trusted was The Salvation Army" (p. 268). So, privatisation or commercialisation would undermine the credibility of its news programs and other current affairs shows, which are focused on providing quality, balanced reporting.
Michael Warby, editor of the Australian Institute of Public Affairs publication IPA Review, argued years ago that the ABC should be privatised, dismantled, or radically reformed (p. 269).
This is precisely the opposite of what the ABC needs in order to continue to function as a balanced and impartial network, despite the further claims by Warby about the influence of its staff. Describing it as a 'staff-captured' organisation, he said he believed that ABC journalists represent an 'opinion cartel' (p. 269).
The impact of privatisation would create widespread public dissatisfaction and we would be inundated with, to put it bluntly, copious amounts of Americanised rubbish and constant crappy commercials. The government funding process couldn't really be made less 'politcal' because the ABC is funded by the people for the people, and the government is entrusted to spend the public's money wisely on quality programming. On another note concerning 'left wing bias' allegations which have repeatedly surfaced against the ABC, my view is that it isn't governed by an specific political agenda, rather it is a media organisation which is 'people orientated', a value which the Labor Party or 'left-wing' traditionally privileges more so than the Liberals.

2. You are a television news director with two strong job applications. One is from a 'telegenic' male, 28, with reasonable skill and experience. The other is from a female, 38. She is of 'average' appearance but has considerable skill and experience. Your present reporting staff consists of four females and one male, none older than 32. Who do you hire, and why?

Since the newsroom has a lack of males, and all the existing employees are not older than 32, it would make sense to hire another young recruit and give him training and work experience, whilst simultaneously balancing the genders. Of course, I'd have to look more closely at their applications, but given the information I've got from the question, that's my decision. Plus, television journalism is predominately about visuals, and someone who looks good on camera is going to appeal to viewers much more!

3. Given the strengths and weaknesses of each medium, which do you think is the 'best communicator' on any given story: radio, television, the web, or newspapers?

All mediums have their advantages and disadvantages. As mentioned in the chapter, broadcast mediums have the advantage of breaking stories first, but print has more of an opportunity to develop an in-depth analysis of any given issue, as the reader has the chance to re-read the material, whereas broadcast is only one chance. TV and radio are accessible by many people, and a most certainly the most widely used mediums for receiving news due to their 'interactive' style. Web material works well as a valuable news resource, but not everyone has easy access to it, so that is where it falls down as an effective communicator. For example, by 1975 there were more radios in America than people, bathtubs, or telephones! An amazing statistic! (Daily Miracle, p. 265). Despite this, I believe that television is the 'best communicator' as it gives a clear and concise summary of a news story. As put by The Daily Miracle, "Television's demands for 'vision' give it less flexibility than radio, but it can use techniques of both film and theatre. Therefore it has more tools than any other medium" (p. 279).
'Television can combine the sound and the audience-orientation of radio, the live continuous performance of theatre and the electronic techniques of film. It is capable of fusing the best of all previous communications media (Hillard 1981, pp. 15-16).

4. During the last federal election campaign do you think the broadcast media focused more on issues or personalities? What could have been done better?

To be quite honest, I wasn't very switched onto politics and the federal election as much as I am now, because I was only 16 years old. All I can really remember was that Mark Latham was the leader of the Opposition (ALP), and John Howard (Liberal Party) won the election. Broadcast media seemed to focus more on the candidates rather than policy because in Australia, party politics criticise each other's leadership credentials and dig up personal information which may work against the leader of a party, rather than focusing on policies and the development of fresh and innovative thinking. Is that very democratic? Both major political parties, Liberal and Labor, have become very similar in their approach to politics, and so as a result the broadcast coverage has become less and less about policy. Anyway, this blog is not designed for a political debate...

JOURNALISM ISSUE ENTRY:

This chapter of "The Miracle" has highlighted one thing from the opening sentence (which just so happens to be the opening sentence):
Compared with print, television as a medium is warm, entertaining, and 'human' (p. 261).
As of much of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, this has been particularly true, with more and more people turning to the broadcast mediums for their news; i.e. 'the world's town crier'.
They do have advantages, they do have disadvantages [over print form]. I liked this summary about the broadcast medium approach towards error:
"If a radio or television reporter makes an on-air mistake it vanishes into the ether. If a web journalist makes an error, a story can be taken offline, corrected, and put back online. But if a newspaper reporter makes a mistake the consequences can be more serious and embarrassing" (p. 263).
The nature of print news, while providing more in-depth analysis on a topic than a broadcast medium can given the time constraints, its lack of flexibility can result in its ultimate downfall.
Plus, as pointed out in the chapter, audiences are easily bored, distracted or frustrated when watching news content. For example: "The average length of a streamed video news story segment on ABC Broadband in 2005 was just under 40 seconds. A television news story may have a 20-second minimum but a maximum of perhaps two minutes" (p. 263). That is the nature of the news today. I've come up with my own quip, which identifies the public's view on news access:
"Give it to me in 10, or forget it, then!" Pretty clever?
Oh, and another thing which this reading has made me continue wondering. Why do people listen to commercial radio stations?
They pump you full of ads, have constant mindless chatter and play terrible mainstream music...and when they do manage to jump on the bandwagon of, let's call it 'alternative' music, they repeat the songs non-stop and ruin their credibility!
My question to all of you radio listeners out there is: Why subject yourself to this, well, (there is no other word for it; TORTURE)?
Triple J all the way, baby!
Need I remind you that this is my blog, and I can say whatever I please? Because I'm going to anyway, and nobody will stop me or tell me otherwise of my firmly established stance on this!
However, on a more disappointing note, all you Triple J fans should read this ABC online article concerning this amazingly talented (not to mention utterly stunning!) TV/radio personality if you haven't already:



Follow the link:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/10/2055588.htm?section=justin

I think I've made my points on these issues clear! No further entries for this week.

Zeej McQueen out!

The Blog Before the Break ~ WEEK 11!

REPORTING FOR DUTY! CHAPTER 11 OF THE DAILY MIRACLE

But first, more of the antics from The Daily Bugle boss!



J. JONAH JAMESON QUOTE OF THE WEEK:

"Tell you what Addicus, you take the pictures, I'll make up the headlines! Ok? Is that ok with you?"

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR THIS EDITION OF ZEEJAY'S JOURNALISM JUNK! (The Daily Miracle, pp. 259-260).

1. I'd listen to the chief-of-staff, no question. If a policeman told me that nobody at the police station would speak to me again if the newspaper runs anything, regardless who writes it, suggests to me that they are blackmailing me and trying to cover something up. I'd go ahead and report that fact, as exposing the police corruption is of high public interest. Also, the fact that the young man who has been bashed has witnesses and a medical report is too hard to disregard for a quality news story! Bring down law abuse and corruption...it's what journalists do! Always have integrity in mind!

2. Would any readers of the newspaper really be interested in one woman stealing a pair of stockings? It's hardly newsworthy, and if she is so distraught that she is on the verge of suicide if the paper publishes anything, it's hardly worth the risk of someone losing their life for a bit of media coverage, regardless of the newspaper's policy of publishing such cases. Bottom line, I wouldn't bother revealing it! Keep in court.

3. Celebrities get themselves into trouble, they deal with it. They are in the public spotlight, and they are often role models to many who look up to them. They must learn to take responsibility for their own actions, just like the rest of us common folk. Too often they get off criminal charges too easily...just think of Paris Hilton! Like the old mantra goes, "If you can't do the time, don't commit the crime" (or something along those lines!). As tempting as it is, you should not take bribes from affluent, influential people, mainly because it may (more likely than not), come back to haunt you, your career and relationships. Journalistic integrity is HIGHLY important in the industry, and everyone entering the profession should have to swear an oath or pledge of allegiance to the media organisation. After all, there is always the MEAA Code of Ethics that all journalists must adhere to. They knew they were putting their career on the line when they indulged in the irresponsible behaviour, so it isn’t my problem. I'm just the middle media man that happened to be at the right place at the right time! But, this famous personality is VERY attractive you say...?

4. In this case, three words: Spill the beans! What do I have to lose if I expose these corrupt cops and jury members? It is in the public interest to know that these people are crooked and accept large bribes. Of course there is the matter of protecting my juror source in the high-profile murder trial who told me in the first place that there would be a hung jury and the bribery situation. Of course there would be more research to be done to confirm the source's claim is valid, but that goes without saying. If there is some sort of possibility, a journalist must always try and pursue it! Most of the time, what do they have to lose? These discussion questions make me wonder if they have been written based on situations that have occurred in a city rife with corruption and greed such as Gotham City.
And we all know what happens when people indulge in such activities there...this super detective finds them out:



If only he really existed and could sort out some people in need of the Bat treatment!

JOURNALISM ISSUE DISCUSSION:

The main message which seemed to illuminate from that chapter was journalists being informed about news and current affairs, as well as accumulating notes and ideas in what was dubbed an 'idea file' for possible future stories.
"A comprehensive contact book is frequently the difference between getting and missing the news" (The Daily Miracle, p. 235).
It is also strongly advisable for journalists to continually scan other news sources from other news organisations to be as informed as possible for the upcoming days events.
If journalists tend to not do this, a busy news day could turn out to be disastrous if they know very little of what's going on in the world! I found that to be an important point rose in this week's chapter.
Stress is also no stranger to journalists, and many cope differently with deadline pressures, which are constantly faced on a daily basis.
According to The Daily Miracle, "A journalist's honest mistake can be interpreted as an attempt to undermine someone's understanding. Some people cannot comprehend balanced reporting" (p. 237).
I had information on time management and the rounds system, but thanks to the wonderful internet and it's reliability, it crashed out on me, so all my thoughts which I had had on them are now gone and I will have to re-do them to the best of my ability...apologies folks!
Anyway, time management is a key strategy for any journalist daily. Some survival strategies may include ending an interview ahead of time, relying on the telephone much more for interviews, and relying much less on the sound recorder when taping other people as it is time-consuming to go back and forth searching for direct quotes! (p. 238).
Now, the rounds system just briefly. Many newspapers have rounds reporters, mainly covered by more experienced journalists in a specific 'area of expertise'. They can include:
-police
-courts
-education
-computer
-business
-social justice
-religion
-media
-arts & entertainment ... the list goes on!

As well as specialist reporters, most newspapers need general assignment journalists for daily events that do not fall into a specific rounds category (p. 240).

As for the trainee/junior journalists? These less experienced reporters do not usually get their own rounds unless they work at smaller newspapers. More often they do their first serious reporting as general-assignment reporters! (p. 240).
That'll do for this week's blogging!

This is Z.J Pink, signing off once again for Zeejay's Journalism Junk!!

!!! ~ HAVE A GREAT BREAK ~ !!!

The Story Factory - Week 10, Chapter 10!

As usual, by overwhelming popular public demand...



J. JONAH JAMESON QUOTE OF THE WEEK:

"Who is Spider-Man? He's a criminal that's who he is! A vigilante! A public menace! What's he doing on MY front page?"

Well you would know Jameson, if you were the half decent editor of The Daily Bugle that you're supposed to be! Perhaps if you paid any attention rather than barking orders all day, you would have some sort of say in what news stories your publication covers!
Now, onto this week's Discussion Questions, and I refer to you to The Daily Miracle, Chapter 10 p. 232:

1. I'd first question this 'confidential source what their reasoning is for requesting me to wait a day to write the story. Then I'd do my best to find out by monitoring other media organisations if they may have the story at all. I would definitely write it that day to the best of my ability, just so the story is out there, and perhaps if I get the chance, over the next few days, I'd do some more research and expand on the groundwork I'd already laid for the story. But, on the flipside, there's the issue of the confidentiality of the source...but going into that would be beyond the focus of this question!

2. The inside source which approached the media obviously knew that there was some element of risk involved, which could possibly include a loss of employment and therefore income, so their motive to expose the resort kitchen's lack of hygiene is clearly a high priority for public interest, otherwise they wouldn't have put themselves and their career at stake, so that part doesn't really concern me. Who knows how many more guests and staff may fall ill due to the current health and hygiene status, and so it is of upmost importance that the public be informed, even if the unfortunate outcome is the loss of 120 jobs and an increased income loss. This is a tough ethical issue, but it is the journalists' role to serve the public! Plus, there is the other side to the argument that if people were becoming ill due to the resort's poor health practices, it asks why hadn't any of the employees/staff come forward and told the honest truth in the interests of the general public?

3. Pardon the language, but I’d be very pissed off that I hadn't been informed earlier about the decision, especially because professionals like solicitors know that newspapers have strict deadlines they have to adhere to in order to get the published material out there, and I'm sure that there could have been more done to inform me sooner. Secondly, I'd want to talk to the journalist who left the court before the judge issued this 'order' prohibiting the publication of a defendant's name, and their reasoning for doing this. Was it their fault? Did they know that the court hearing wasn't over? I'd find this out. In the end, I would have to, to use the cliché, 'stop the presses' because legal action against defamation by far outweighs the possible chaos and confusion that will ensue in delaying the production process. Surely it will be inconvenient, and things may not be exactly on schedule, but that's the reality of news sometimes! AND, on top of that, I’d be very sceptical about my solicitor contact's apparent drunk state!

4. I would take both into account, but in the end, it is the editor and the media organisation that employs me to do my job, so I would have to listen to them and take his perspective rather than the police rounds reporter's angle. He may be more knowledgeable about the subject, but I have a duty to fulfil to the newspaper and media organisation I work for. I can take advice from the police, but when it all comes down to it, they can't necessarily influence a way a story is written once they have provided the information. On the same token, journalists can't take the law into their own hands and make suggestions as to what they would like to see changed in law enforcement and policing.

JOURNALISM ISSUE ENTRY:

The Story Factory was mainly informative about the structure and hierarchy of the newsroom. Of course there is no common, 'universal' structure, but all have one thing in common: DEADLINES.
They have to be met at all costs, and the news gathering process can often be very difficult!
There can be the issue of journalists receiving PR produced media releases and simply adapting them into a news story without any further thought of why the media release may have been sent, or practice of ethical journalism.
As per The Daily Miracle, former journalist and Sydney public relations executive Jim Macnamara surveyed journalists and editors in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, and Canberra and found that 86 per cent reported 'very frequent' contact from PR practitioners (p. 214).
In addition, a parallel survey by the same researcher found that 31 per cent of news stories in a range of media were based 'wholly or partly' on news releases.
Now, what else was newsworthy about this chapter???
Some of the questions that chief-of-staff ask of a reporter's stories were also very intriguing...certainly will give me an edge in the real world.
And in reading the descriptions of the various newsroom roles, I think I'd love to be Chief Sub Editor...mainly because I am so choice at making up awesome headlines.
Just thought I ought to share that with you!

This is Z.J Pink signing off for another outrageous edition of Zeejay's Journalism Junk !!!

Week the 9th: Interviewing & CAR

This week, what a treat...
Double the fun with two lots of textbook chapter readings! Be prepared to be enlightened about the world of journalism with the core skill of interviewing and Computer Assisted Reporting (CAR).

But first, as usual, it's time for everyone's favourite segment...



J. JONAH JAMESON QUOTE OF THE WEEK:

"What, is he shy? If we can get a picture of Julia Roberts in a thong, we can certainly get a picture of this weirdo!"

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

1. Which would you choose: a direct quotation that is accurate but unclear and embarrassing to the speaker, or one that is clear but is inexact and makes the speaker appear more eloquent than he or she really is?

The public is more concerned with receiving a message which is clear rather than something that is 100% accurate but hard to understand, so I'm going to have to go with the clear, inexact quotation. Accuracy is highly important in this situation, and it is the journalist's job to deliver this to the readership. In this case, I believe that readership ease takes priority. Plus, who am I to say how eloquent the interviewee is based on one direct quotation? It is instrumental in this situation to give your source a fair treatment to ensure a positive, mutual relationship is maintained, whilst at the same time satisfying your newspaper readership.

2. Is it ever justified for a journalist to intimidate a source with a threat of 'public exposure' to get important public information?

Yes, indeed! I believe that journalists should adhere to their job in endeavouring to serve the public to the best of their ability in getting the news out there, even if that means constantly probing for information, which would be hard to achieve via conventional research methods. Still, there is no need to dig so deep for information unless it is of high public interest! (Mainly because there is a great deal of effort and time involved in the information gathering process, especially interviewing people face to face!)

3. Is it a reasonable strategy for a journalist - male or female - to use 'personal chemistry' to get information from sources when there is public interest at stake?

This depends on the nature of the story's subject and how much the information is in the public interest! I suppose if other methods of extrapolating information are not working, then I see no problem in attempting to use these alternative methods such as 'personal chemistry' - when it all comes down to it, the relationship between the interviewer and interviewee can have unintentional chemical and physical components, even in the most formal and professional situations - it's just human nature!.

4. What potential dangers could come back to haunt a journalist who gets too close to a source?

To name a few:

- Significantly damaged reputation
- Decreased readership/viewership of a media organisation's various publications
- Losses of trust and respect in the journalism profession/field of work employers, fellow work colleagues, family and the general public
-Loss of job, family breakdowns etc
- Similar repercussions for the source's career, relationships, personal and public life
- Possible legal action for defamation charges and non-professional behaviour

5. Who is the most inarticulate, word-mangling public figure regularly in the news at present? Should you feel sorry for them and clean up their direct quotes or let them stew in their own frying pan?

That's easy. It'd have to be this man:



Quote: "Is our children learning?"
Quote: "They have mis-underestimated us"
Quote: "I'm the master of low expectations" (The Daily Miracle Ch 9, p. 205)

In Bush's case, since he is the President of the United States, there shouldn't be a reason to clean up his direct quotes, as one would assume that the leader of one of the most powerful nations on earth would be an articulate, well-spoken individual. But, sadly for Mr. Bush, this is not the case.
I feel some sympathy for him because of his lack of public speaking skills and therefore I would feel compelled to adjust minor grammatical errors, however if the quotes are anything like the aforementioned, they must be left untouched as to expose his somewhat 'unintelligence' for the good of public interest.

JOURNALISM ISSUE DISCUSSION:

Now, why is interviewing such a core skill? From reading Chapter 9 of The Daily Miracle, I gather that it is an essential skill that every journalist will have to use at various points in their careers. It's inevitable. I learnt that the key elements for a successful interview are:
-Good research/knowledge accumulation
-Listen intently
- Follow up any info that the interviewee gives ASAP with a related question

The Daily Miracle (Ch 9) provides a nice, concise quote on the interview as an information-gathering tool:
"The challenge is in ensuring fact, not prejudice, shapes the resulting story" (Ch 9. Interviewing, a core skill).

Securing the interview, it seems, can be hard, as the interviewee may have a hectic schedule to adhere to, and scarcely finds time to talk to the media. Any old excuses are fired at the reporter for why they may be unavailable, and it is the job of the journalist to be persistent in contacting them to arrange a suitable time for an interview. A journalist should ALWAYS have a backup plan in case an intended interviewee has failed to respond or return a call such as trying to reach them via alternative contact methods such as email or fax, try a third party such as friends, family or work colleagues, or even in exceptional circumstances of public interest, 'door stop' the interviewee. According to The Daily Miracle, it is more difficult to avoid people in person.

And another important thing. Appearances are not deceiving. It should not matter what a person looks like or how they dress, but it frequently does. People react consciously or subconsciously to all kinds of signals (Ch 9. p. 189). The expectation is that a journalist will blend into any crowd.

Although to me, the key to a successful interview was all in the section about non-verbal clues: i.e. body language. A journalist must learn to read the signs given by an interviewee, as they provide valuable hints as to if the information they are giving is valid, and whether the reporter needs to ask for any clarification or probe further for more in-depth analysis from the subject.

A good example of body language playing an important part in an interview is the recent Andrew Johns drug exposure, where Phil Gould interviewed Johns on Channel Nine's NRL Footy Show. John's body language gives both the interviewer an insight into Johns' own feelings on the subject, as well as assisting in what question(s) should be asked next. The audience can also identify certain emotions just by observing Johns' body language. The links for Part One & Two of the interview from You Tube are below:

Andrew Johns Ecstasy Interview - Part 1 of 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF6wpyu4Vq4&mode=related&search=

Andrew Johns Ecstasy Interview - Part 2 of 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOJfZMUkx-4&mode=related&search=

COMPUTER ASSISTED REPORTING (CAR) Chapter 15.

The Discussion Questions for this chapter are very long-winded and complex, so to make life easier, I'll just refer you to The Daily Miracle, p. 368.

1. From my interview with The Newcastle Herald Journalist Ben Smee, he gave me some fantastic advice and told me to gain some experience in a small newspaper as you are given more responsibilities and gain skills you will use for your entire journalism career. Plus, it is a different experience living away from a predominately metro area, so I'd take that job versus the insecure, 6-month only city contract.

2. I would first question why it needs to be email and attempt to negotiate (a fairly empty cause when it comes to politicians). Then if she still persisted on using email, I would probably just end up going ahead with it, because having some factual information at all is better than having none for public interest. Sometimes you just have to accept sources won't always co-operate in the way you want them to every time. That's the reality of journalism and media.

3. Whilst plagiarism is a serious issue, it is hardly worth dobbing on someone and jeopardising their entire career, possibly putting a massive dent in future employment prospects and significantly affects their family and social life. I would keep it to myself at first, then approach my colleague at a suitable time and place and have a discussion with them about why they felt the need to plagiarise (all non-threatening of course!). Then perhaps if they know someone found them out, they won't do it again. I'd maybe even monitor their stories over time just to check and make sure that the stories they are producing are their own work. I'd only ever take the matter to the boss if:
a) It was a major, influential story of huge public interest, which has the potential to reach and affect many people (in my view)
b) He or she was a repeat offender, and my help couldn't go any further in assisting their dishonest journalism

4. However good information this unknown contact has, is it really worth risking my life to find out what he knows? How do I know he is not a criminal himself? I don't. And as the old journalism mantra goes, when in doubt, leave it out. 2am, alone at a bank of a river? Sounds very suspicious to me, like something out of a horror film before the murderer brutally kills me and dumps me in the nearby river. Dying for the cause of a good story that will never be published? No thankyou!

5. Like any web based material, check the referencing for source accuracy. If any of the quotes cannot be traced to a reliable source, "if in doubt, leave it out".

Well, you are probably sick of my opinions on discussion questions by now, so in the words of the coolest kid ever, Ferris Bueller:



Are you still here? It's over. Go home............GO!