Blogs in my future...

I have discovered that blogging is not going to end once I post my final topic for this class on that glorious day in May.

The magazine I work for launched it's website in September and has been growing ever since. It's actually kind of cool if you are interested in learning more about the city.

www.7x7sf.com

Already they have incorportated blogs into the website. There is an Eat+Drink blog, with bloggers including the food editor, and a contributing wine expert. The latest blog talks about the food editors trip to Costco! It has many pictures and gives the inside tibits on restaurants in the city, one recent blog also even talked about food books.
A nightlife blog which does reviews of different concerts,t he most recent from Mickey Avalon from Thursday night. There are also many photos that are done by (thanks to the fact that we bought SPIN magazine last yaer) Misha Vladimirskiy whose photos are seen spread over all music magazines (and I think take a new approach to music photography, and are pretty cool to look at)
And a Social Studies blog that are done by contributing writers. Drew Altzier (known in SF to be THE photographer to the socialites and social scene) which shows his pictures of different events, galas,...gatherings of people who are (which is funny to me) considered the SF socialites. And Hooman (Alice radio personality) has a blog about movies, fashion week...entertainment in general.

What is funny about this is that, after I graduate working in marketing will become my fulltime job (hurray!!! at least thats one less thing to stress about) and also they are allowing me to go to Europe for a month, which I have already completely booked flights and hotels for a month (yay!) but my boss thought this would be a good idea for a blog...
Where in the World is Whitney
And pose with 7x7 at different famous monuments, do a blog about fun finds and the things I have seen.
....and I thought I was getting a vacation.

(I know this isn't journalism related to ethics...but thought it was a fun and funny story!)

Oh Barry Bonds

It seems that most of the news stories I read (or remember reading..or care about reading) has to do something with scandal. Oh muckraking.

What I found interesting about the Barry Bonds article is thinking... How do you write something ethically that is centered around something else that is ethically debated? I dont feel like I said that very eloquently...but Ill try to explain.

Last year in my ethic's class, as part of the CORE for school,our final group project was 'Enhancement' and we could pick a subtopic. One of the boys in my group, who is a USF baseball player chose Steroids. He had a very convincing argument that he was okay with steroids. That enhancement is all around, from Botox to diet pills, it was a part of modernization. And also...major league baseball takes a lot of skill and hard work and its not like a normal person is going to hit a pitch from a major league pitcher if they are on steroids or not. He was basically justifying the fact that major league baseball players taking steroids, isn't a big deal. That taking them isn't an ethical issue. Because whether or not you take steriods, if you aren't at that level to begin with you aren't going to be able to hit a major league pitch.

This is very interesting
So if he were the journalist writing the story on Bonds as he approaches the homerun record, he would not talk about how it would be tainted due to steriod use. but if there were a writer who had strong opinions that the ethics of steriods are extremely wrong, then the story will be centered about that. It was like in the reading where we see that journalists bring their own opinions and ideas to a story and from that will emphasis certain parts, discount otheres and even completely ignore some.
So the Chronicle does have a fine line to walk. whether they are going to go back on their stories from the past, or how they will approach the ones in the future.
It makes you think about each article that is written. What the authors personal ethics are behind the story. Although all stories are suppose to be fair and balanced, there most likely is some other story behind it, the authors own ideals and ethics.

What do you think?

Is it right to add your boss as your friend on myspace?

Bloggers

I find it pretty funny that I have a blog. To be honest I always thought they were sort of cheezy, like diaries, or things you wish you could tell people but don't, but put it on the internet because you know that they can read it.

I think the debate of whether bloggers are journalists is a very very interesting one. I haven't taken any digital journalism classes, only good old fashion paper ones, so I feel like my knowledge isn't as wide as others. I'm not really sure where this blog is going but here it goes...

So if I am writing this blog and it is published online, does that mean that I'm a journalist? can I put my blog on my resume? Will employers actually care that I do have a blog? Maybe one day in the future when kids my age are running things, but maybe not now? Or maybe I underestimate people who are older (than me) ..handle of the internet. I think I receive more Emails from Robertson than anyone in my whole life (do email from your phone to and from wherever you are going? whenever I check my email I'm always happy to get something of substance, and 9 times out of 10 its from robertson!) Will employers ask for a blog? I don't even know what I'd list it under on my resume. Activities? blogging?

What this brings me to is Celebrity Blogging. Often times Perez Hilton has the scoop way before Us Weekly or Star or People can print it. And, the majority of the time its very true. The reason I thought of this is when I signed onto my email, the first story up was about how Britney Spears checked into rehab and out again in 24 hours (poor girl) And I went directly to Perez because I knew he would have more of the dirt on it. Although he does use a great deal of opinion, he coins celebrities. Britney is the hard pAArtying mother of two. And he does feel bad for Sh**ney and doesn't even wish her well. Harsh! But he did have the information on where and when all these happened, more information than my email news gave me. He also was pointed out in Outing out Lance Bass. I was definitely into Perez Hilton when I was studying abroad last year, because I didn't have those magazines to flip through in a salon or checkout at the grocery store. So I looked daily at what was going on in LA...who was dating who, who got divorced, who flashed what where. But he called Lance Bass "Princess frosty locks" and posted pictures of him and his boyfriend Reichen all over the place, including a picture taken in SF during Pride week. Lance hadn't come out to the media or most of his friends yet. But Lance did say that Perez put pressure on him to come out. When he finally did and it was all over the media I felt like. Yah..so what...I knew that like months ago. So my debate is whether Perez (or bloggers similar to him, like Trent from pinkisthenewblog.com, can be considered a journalist or not. He doesn't get direct quotes from celebrities, he uses them from other sources. (usually providing a hyperlink to that article) he uses pictures from other places. His sources some of the time are anyomous (it is said he does this because he is actually friends with celebrities. he can be seen partying with Paris Hilton and others... so its possible quotes and inside information are with his famous connections that don't want to seem like a rat)
What gives him the right to use other peoples pictures and quotes. is it because it is the internet? Is he more credible because he can get insider information and post it a lot faster than a magazine can print? He also isn't afraid to make mistakes, he will post something right away without waiting for confirmed details or an exclusive quote. Can he do all this because hes not a journalist? And its like another blog except for mine has had maybe 30 hits while his gets millions by the day? Does popularity factor into that?
I think this would be a great class discussion.



www.perezhilton.com
www.trent.blogspot.com
www.postsecret.blogspot.com (my personal fav)

my job won't pay me less than 30,000 or I'm bouncing

...but maybe thats because I'm doing the business side of media?

anyway. this week I have been thinking a lot about interviewing, and paying attention to news and interviewing techniques etc.. I think the one reason that I have felt that I will not end up being a journalist is because I don't have the same passion and drive as other people around me. I don't want to have a 'lead' and chase it, unless maybe its something very near and dear to my hear, but I honestly don't see that happening.

All this talk about interviews made me think of why I don't want to be a journalist. I'm not very good at asking questions unless I have prethought them out and they are written down in front of me. If the interviewee goes off topic I tend to get nervous. I'm not really into asking the hard hitting questions. I'd be too nervous. Also when I'm interviewing I feel like I dont have a place to pretend like I know what I am talking about, unless it is on a topic I know well .I know interviewing is done so you can learn more about the person or the thing that they are talking about, but I still feel like I'm not of authority to be asking those kinds of questions.
All these thoughts for some very strange reason kept making me think of Michael Moore. I haven't seen his documentaries in a couple years, but his interviewing techniques have stuck in my brain. From ..what it seems like..rushing politicians on the street to ask questions, usually uncomfortable one. Or his interview during Bowling for Columbine, when he interviewed I think it was the unibombers brother. How could he sit there and act like everything this crazy man was saying was okay? Also, he went to Charleton Heston's house, under the pretense of seeming like he was a fan and then starts turning the tables and bombarding him with questions on is involvement with the NRA and some of his insensitive appearances. This only bothered me because of the false pretense he had, in order to make Charleton Heston meet with him and also....the man is old, and I'm pretty sure senile. I heard later that he didn't really remember a lot of that stuff, and isnt exactly lucid, so it seemed mean to go to this man's house and ask him these kinds of questions with him thinking you were on his side. Is it write to do that kind of thing to get an interview? Is there no line drawn? Would most other journalists consider this a good thing? That he is making progress or is he just being abrasive?

Oh Gavin

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/02/01/MNGM8NSSD91.DTL

After arriving at work and hearing the buzz about the scandal of Newsom. (who he and alex are both friends of the magazine, Newsom I have met twice, Alex and his wife a few times). I wasn't so shocked per say..but it is sad it involved a close friend of his and that he (alex) stepped down.)
I feel that this is a great show of how the media can be a watchdog of our society. Journalism at its best.
When I got home I watched Kron4, and they were interviewing people on the street at how they felt about this. If their feelings towards Newsom had changed or how they viewed the situation. There were several people interviewed. All said that, this was private and didn't change their opinion of how Newsom handles himself in office. Only one girl said it changed her personal opinion of Newsom himself but doesn't feel it changes how he is as a Mayor. A couple men said they'd rather focus on the city and helping the city. One older woman stated that he was a lot better than Feinstien who 'beautified herself instead of the city'.
A question I have is, is it ethical for a TV station to put several q and a's from the street, all of which who had the same opinion? (that it didn't change their opinion of him as mayor, that he shouldn't step down etc etc). Besides being a watchdog, the media also has a duty to provide fair and balanced information. yes if everyone feels that way then thats the way to report, but I have a hard time thinking thats everyones opinion) I guess this is hard to decide without all the facts. Perhaps no one felt that this was a disgrace or that he should step down or not run for re-election.

I switched to another station and found James Carville, and a Republican advisor (whose name I forget) give their opinions on the matter. They both don't think it will end his career, but James Carville thinks he wouldn't be able to run for a national office anytime soon and the Republican advisor felt that he could never run for national office.
It will be interesting to see how this pans out in the media and what happens within our city hall. And to see if all information or opinions will be one sided or if the next time I turn on the channel there will be interviews where they are differences of opinion and everyone is represented. (Is kron4 known to be a gavin supporter? or be more liberal than conservative? dare I say democratic than republican?)