Journalism Conference

Last night I attended the Jounalism Conference at my alma mater, USF. It was the first time I have been back on campus since graduation! It was great to see old professors and classmates, and it gave me a new found reason to start blogging again!

Between hearing about all of their struggles and success to get where they are: From moving 8 times in 4 years, standing in the rain, sleet, snow, fire (insert natural disaster/weather pattern here) to all of their advice, it was well worth the trip!

Although some of their advice, being a college grad doesn't apply anymore (though it is true, INTERNSHIPS are key! that's how I got the desk I am sitting at now), I still found it extremely helpful and enjoyable to listen to. Especially, the, "Don't do what you don't want to do" one. I totally understand

I still wish I knew what they thought a good starting salary is (so I could either go home and cry myself to sleep or jump for joy all the way home.. I hope jumping!)

Now I hope I can turn this blog back into a real journalism think tank, and still be involved in the journalism world! (though right now my writing consists of all marketing - event recaps, propsoals, sponsorships, etc etc etc) Maybe one day I'll go back! (or freelancing sounds like fun!!!)


More to come. Promise.

So I got into the blogging thing...

And i realized it was a great way to keep friends and family in touch while I backpack europe for a month!
so if anyone still reads this my travel blog is..

My Trip


ciao!

My Ethical Standards

If I were a newspaper, what would my standards be?

-Reporters should be fair, and should be accurate and report the truth, which they came to by many interviews and deep research
-Reporters should disclose any conflict of interests and/or biases before writing a piece, or in premise of the piece.
-If a mistake is made it should be reported, and if were made online it should not be deleated, but added on to.
-The newsroom should be diverse in gender, age, race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation and so on, but their pieces they write should not harbor any opinion or biases towards their specific make up.
-The writing, pictures and illustrations should not harm, or harrass anyone and be sensitive to gender, sexual or disability issues




While I think of more I will add more to my creed.

2 thoughts

First, I'm interviewing Zach Braff today. Super nervous, as always.



Second, I think we should go for a drink during class. and after class, do my last day of classes ever, right.

So Wikipedia hates me....

I have an 'account' with Wikipedia, and Mr Wiki and I have been discussing my contribution to the movie listing of His Girl Friday. Apparently I lost.

MR WIKI -
It appears you're new here. I must point out your contribution appears to violate WP:Original Research and arguably WP:Notability. Please read these policies (and maybe WP:What Wikipedia is not) before reinserting again. If you still disagree, please respond here; I'll watch for it. Thanks. Clarityfiend 20:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

ME -
I'm not sure I understand. I think the movie has pedagogical signficance. The idea seems to be original, there is no ethical dimensions noted about the movie. And, being a media studies student, and journalism student at a University feel it is important for others studying journalism and media studies. This is a class study and similar sections have been added by classmates to Capote and All the Presidents Men. I wonder how mine is different.

MR WIKI -
Let me quote from the Wikipedia official position on what it is not:
"Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information not heretofore published. Please do not use Wikipedia for any of the following:
1. Primary (original) research such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, etc. If you have done primary research on a topic, publish your results in other venues such as peer-reviewed journals, other printed forms, or respected online sites, and Wikipedia will report about your work once it becomes part of accepted knowledge. Not all information added to Wikipedia has to be from peer-reviewed journals, but please strive to make sure that information is reliable and verifiable. For example, citing book, print, or reliable web resources demonstrates that the material is verifiable and is not merely the editor's opinion."

Another way to look at it is to ask yourself if you would expect to see something like this in a film article in the Encyclopedia Britannica or Encarta.

Ethical dimensions are normally not noted in a movie page because the article is about the movie itself. Something of this sort might (possibly) be better suited to a different article: Journalism ethics and standards. The only way it would be appropriate in a movie article is if that film had a significant effect on ethics - off the top of my head, I can't think of any.

As for why your classmates haven't been similarly afflicted by someone like me, Wikipedia's a big place, and this film is a bit more popular than the others you mentioned. I'm sure somebody will get around to it eventually. Or if you prefer, I could go harass them myself (lol). Clarityfiend 03:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)



I didn't want to harass my classmates no, I was just confused as to what I did wrong or different! Very interesting....

V.Tech NBC Controversy

I am extremely sensitive to victims families in a tragedy. (I guess it takes one to know one). It's super hard to be on the outside. I remember thinking about the Oklahoma City Bombing tragedy and how, because I was removed, the footage and coverage made me shudder and I was sad for it, but it didn't bother me to know it was on the air. But then once you are on the inside, at least for me, you become super sensitive to anyone mentioning it, even something short in passing, I think, what right do they have? What do they know? And I most definitely don't want to see pictures or videos or anything that would give a visual to my horrible memory.
I'm assuming this is what the victims families felt, and why they canceled their appearance on NBC after NBC decided to air the "mulitmedia manifesto".
The two sides are that, one, showing the footage let the killer re-victimize his targets, on the other hands people are concerned and want to know what caused this, and its a journalistic responsibility to show what drove this.
I personally feel that the footage should not have been aired. I just think it was too much too soon. And as it was brought up in an article, its an unfortuante 15 minutes of fame that perhaps could drive copycat killers to the same thing. It makes me so upset that someone would take the lives of innocent people, if you are going to kill yourself, how selfish is it to take along others, who are just like me and you, with them? Its a serious, heartbreaking issue. I think its unfortunate that the image of the killer saying, you had a hundred billion ways of stopping this.,,, is not one that I needed to be burned into my memory. I think I understood he was not right in the head already...

I just had an interesting discussion at lunch with workmates about this, and one man, sarcastically, acting like a reporter leaned across the table pretending to hold a mic up to another workmates face and said "how did you feel, sitting next to your best friend who was shot three times..."and he went on from there like....how the heck do you think I should feel?
Exactly.

What better way to spend Easter than watching..

Blood Diamond.

another movie about a journalist whose trying to do good?

I don't see anything ethically challenging here.

(excpet her wanting Leo to go off the record in which he responds
"I like to get kissed before I get f...ed"
Thats one way to put it. And her ways of interviewing...dancing with Leo while asking him questions. Interesting technique, though I might have done the same ;)


"You're a reporter, eh? Well piss off"