Media Criticism and Tiger Woods

On Tuesday night I was watching television, now it was about 10 pm so what am I watching you may ask?  The Daily Show on Comedy Central of course.  As I was watching the issue of Tiger Woods came up and Jon Stewart again pointed out a very good piece of journalist criticism.  I don’t know much about the Tiger Woods situation and I don’t really care that much about it.  But Stewart raised my level of interest, not in the situation itself, but in the way the media is handling it.

The news media can’t seem to get a handle on the questions that they are asking about this case.  Stewart did his typical montage of the media that revealed a lot of nonsense questions that have no purpose being asked in the news.  Much of this belongs in the tabloids.  One question I heard that stood out to me the most was, what type of golf club did his wife use to bash out the window?  Who cares?  Why is that so necessary that it takes up national news time? Was he barefoot?? Is there any point to asking ridiculous questions that the news media m won’t get the answer to?

Another thing that grinds my gears is the apparent hypocritical nature of the media and their anchors.  At one point you hear phrases that begin to make since.  Things like “I don’t like all the speculation” and “its nobodies business,” but then they turn around and speculate.  There needs to be more control of what is covered in the media.  It shouldn’t be handled in this way because it is causing the downfall of modern news media.

Everyone should definitely check out the video of The Daily Show here at:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-1-2009/tiger-woods-newzak

Blogging as a profession

It seems today that the public knowledge database is shifting to focus on individual blogs.  Not big news industries but little one or two person reasearch blogs.  Knowing that in today’s world the media is ever-changing, one big question has been posed to individuals or groups who are seeking to make a profit in this new environment.  How?  What is something one must provide to gain the trust and credibility among the internet’s vast amount of information.

The key to being a succesful blogger is split up into several factors.  The first would be that you must have a topic that you are truly interested in.  Such as blogging about bicycles, movies, or video games.  If you can portray you passion for what you are blogging about in you blog, you have a better chance of pulling in an audience.  Another factor to being succesful is proving your credentials.  It helps to have them too.  If you can show that you have some knowledge about your subject it is more likely that people are going to believe and trust what you say.  One of the major turn offs of some bloggers is when the bloggers never seem to cite information or have no justification for what they are saying.  The last factor that I think is necessary to have when you wish to blog is your personal code of ethics.  This shows your audience what you are willing to do and not willing to do.  A code of ethics is crucial so it helps build credibility to your name.

If all goes well, you will have an audience that follows what you say.

“How do I get paid for it?” you may ask.  Well to me that is the tough part because it is out of your control.  If companies manufacture things that are related to what you are blogging over find your information useful they might want their products advertised on your blog.  Whether it is a review of a product or just advertising in general, this is the number one way to make money in the world of blogging.

Gender and Race in the Media

The issue of race and gender representation is a very touchy subject when it comes to mass media.  People feel that they must include all races into the picture when they are creating an advertisement or movie.  The other side of this argument is that there should be no special efforts made to fill “quotas” for race and that it is all subjective.  I agree with Kittross when saying that I think that races represented in a commercial ad or movie should be representational of the location.

Kitross believes that we should focus more on the individual, rather than the “big” picture.  I feel that special efforts to be representational of the all genders and races is itself a form of racism and sexism.  With that said, I feel that any special treatment of any sort to any race or gender is racism.  The advertisement of the Wisconsin College that doctored in an African-American among a bunch of Caucasian kids is a perfect example.  I believe that this type of thing is absurd.

Another issue that Kittross deals with is that of political correctness.  I think that there is no possible way to have a language that offends no one.  One old controversy that I feel is appropriate here is the issue of shopping store greeters greeting with  “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Holidays.”  Yes, some people don’t follow Christianity and aren’t apart of our customs but if you change one thing, you are going to upset more people.  I’m not saying that I prefer greeters to say “Merry Christmas” but merely that I don’t approve of them changing their slogan for the mere attempt to include everyone.  That is impossible.

One final argument that I would like to make is how is it even possible to represent all races and genders in something without completely skewing the whole concept of “equal” representation.  The more a commercial attempts to include everyone, the more likely they are to skewing what the actual representation of that certain situation would be.

Digitally Editing Photos

Manipulation of photos for journalism, propaganda, or any other source attempting to be credible is something that should defiantly be watched for closely.   These can distort the truth and mislead viewers to accept claims that may not exist at all.  Kittross notes that manipulation of images has been around for centuries, but with the digital age it has become much easier to “professionally” edit photos invisibly.

One example of the dark side of editing photos comes in June 1994 when Time’s put their front cover as OJ Simpson during his trial.  The Time’s edited the photo to appear much darker then it originally was to create a specific “mood” to convey to the audience.  This is one of the most unethical things a magazine could do.  This will create an image in the mind of the people, that OJ is guilty, no matter what the facts of the case are.  Who are the editors at the Time’s to decide if he is guilty?  Other things such as replacing people with other people, or slimming down public figures to make them more acceptable to the public are equally unethical.  It all distorts the facts.  One example that we discussed in class was the case of the photo of Beirut, Lebanon after a Israeli bombing.  The photo was edited to create more smoke and damage then there really was, and a news organization found the picture and published it.  It is important that we are vigilant in the search of fake and false photos because if the public and news organizations aren’t watching out for this there can be a repeat of this very incident.  To me, it would be important to establish your credibility as a photojournalist with a code of ethics.  Manipulation of digital content in the entertainment world, is a little different because there is not any attempt at conveying the truth to the audience, unless stated otherwise.

Violence and Pornography in Meida

Violence and sex has been apart of our society since the earliest recorded history.  Chapter 10 in Controversies in Media Ethics deals with subjects such as these and how the media world should deal with them.  Kittross asserts that sex and violence are reflections of the society that we live in.  Attempts to control media content would be worse than the content itself.  Of course on the other end of the table is Gordan stating that today’s violence and pornography is far too potent and is harmful for the public and should be controled and mediated.  When I look at the subject, I tend to agree with Kittross’ view.

When the issue of violence’s influence on children is brought up, the argument is that violence can warp the mind of young impressionable children.  I think that this argument is flawed.  A game isn’t likely to likely to alter the mind of a young impressionable child.  The video game Grand Theft Auto is a perfect example of this.  I know many kids who played this game when they were growing up, me included, and to my knowledge  none of them have become stolen cars or committed majors crimes.  I believe that this is because there is plenty of counter offensive material to provide a guide for their minds.  If the parents have done proper parenting and provided a proper rule for the child to follow, video games like Grand Theft Auto won’t really have that much effect.

On the subject of pornography and other obscene material, I see that it is incredibly hard to have a definite definition for these subjects.  With Democracy comes many people and many views.  Having laws that control the content of the media might be just to some but to others in might be infringement on their rights.  I think that the real content controllers should be the parents and the controllers of the household.

Contradictions in Codes of Ethics

When you look at the SPJ (Society of Professional Journalists) code of ethics, it may seem as the clear-cut method of thinking but there are some very real contradictions in that very code.  The very basis of the contradictions is the separation between Deontological based ethics and Teleological based ethics.  Deontological ethics thinkers are devoted to principle and following the “text-book” rules of media.  Teleological ethics thinkers is focused more around the consequence of actions that can be taken.

This division is key when looking at the SPJ code of ethics.  The contradictions begin with the titles of the sections with in the code.  The first is “Seek Truth and Report It.”  This is a very duty based way of thinking.  The principle of reporting the truth exists over all other aspects.  This is contrary to another section entitled “Minimize Harm.”  This is a consequence based form of thinking.  Minimizing harm by showing compassion for people adversely affected by news coverage can only be accomplished by thinking about the consequences of revealing the entire truth.

Obligation to Manipulate of the Media

Manipulation of the media can be done literally by anyone these days.  All it takes is a computer and an internet connection.  I on the other hand never had considered this concept so easily attainable.  I took for granted the fact that I can simply log into an internet forum on a newspaper site or any other public forum site. With that being said, every person needs to know that they have the obligation to help keep in check news organizations and government.

It is important for ordinary citizens to speak out against things that they see unfair or not fit for the public and the internet sets up the perfect venue to accomplish this task.  If the news reports on an event unfairly or screws up facts, I believe that a concerned citizen needs to show the true facts.

Also I believe the news outlets should take into account blogs, or other internet activity to help spread the public word.  Again though, I don’t want this to become an excuse for the news organizations to be lazy.  They shouldn’t show items that are just there to arouse fear mongering or to enrage other opinionated people.

This leads me to my final point of this post.  I think that people should make clear and coherent arguments without the traits listed above.  They should leave out name calling and other negative bias.  Also citizens who are interested in certain events and know the facts about that event have an obligation to speak up when information is being skewed about said event.

It is my hope that every person would take to the internet in order to achieve the highest possible public good in order to better our lives.

Manipulation of the Media

Chapter 5 in Controversies in Media Ethics is about manipulation of the media by outside sources.  Examples of this could be businesses, government, non-profit organizations, etc.  Carol Ruess and David Gordan argue against each other on both sides of this issue.  Ruess believes that journalists and other media organizations, including entertainment, should use stories and information from organizations that are well constructed and written.  Gordan on the other hand believes that no matter what the case is the media shouldn’t accept stories that are brought to the media organizations by these outside groups.

In my opinion Ruess has the correct idea.  The media cannot afford to ignore information offered to them by these outside groups.  “Try as they might, they cannot know or see everything.”  Journalists need to take advantage of opportunities that are given to them to help save time.  Also Ruess states that many of the public relations practitioners that create such stories are well versed in the craft of news practices, which to me says that these stories are up to par with stories done by the media organizations.  If they offer fair, accurate, and complete information, there is no reason why the announcements shouldn’t be used.  This shouldn’t be an excuse for just airing information without scrutiny. Research into the topic of the material that is being provided is of the up most importance for the media organizations to accomplish.  Fact checking will help ensure that they are broadcasting full and accurate information.

Gordan states that not using information provided to the media by public relations practitioners will help the PR practitioners because they will be developing technical and professional skills that they otherwise wouldn’t have developed.  I think this just isn’t fair to say because theses practitioners already have developed well versed technical and professional skills.  Another disagreement I have with Gordan’s viewpoint is the section on product placement.  I believe product placement is just natural in our capitalist society.

Finally I want to say that I don’t think that this act is granting automatic access to groups  with agendas to advance.  I believe that the said scenarios would be put to the highest scrutiny and standards before the messages reach the public eye.  Although I maybe wrong, I have seen some inaccurate information broadcasted without scrutiny before.

Murder rates in St. Louis and Springfield

The city population in St. Louis, Mo at the end of 2008 was 340,256 people while in Springfield it was 151,859 people.  Also the murder statistics in St. Louis, Mo were 73 while the murder statistics in Springfield, Mo were 6 in 2008 according to CityRating.com.

Good and Bad use of statistics in the news

As I was looking through many stories involving statistics on the major news outlets, I found two the stuck out to me as a definite good and bad use of numbers.

The good use of statistics is a story entitled “Cabinet officials, Chicagoans discuss ways to end teen violence” and was published by CNN.  This story is about the alarming high numbers of teens exposed to violence.  This story uses numbers in a good way because it states what survey they are getting their statistics from and discussing the numbers in a simple and easy way, that is easy to understand.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/07/chicago.violence/index.html

The other use of statistics in news reporting comes from the New-Leader in the article entitled “C-Street crime tough to gauge.”  The use of numbers comes in when it shows the statistics of 911 calls in that area for a period of three months compared to that same time last year.  I think this isn’t good because of the fact that the News-Leader didn’t take into consideration of population change from one period to another.  The population of an area seems to go hand and hand with crime rates.  If there was no population change, I think that should have been stated in the article.

http://www.news-leader.com/article/20090918/NEWS01/909180343/C-Street+crime+tough+to+gauge