Today is also the launch of YouTube's new journalism channel, Reporter's Center. It's a collection of videos from various notable members of the press "helping you report the news."
So far, it's a quality page. There are an impressive amount of videos, more than 30 at the moment, which is much more than I had envisioned for day one. More importantly, most of them are rather useful.
We're treated to the fantastic Scott Simon of National Public Radio, who weighs in that all stories need details, so that little parts stick when they are retold. Stuff like what brand of shoes a victim was wearing when a storm swept her away. Lizzie O'Leary from Bloomberg News lays out how to do a story with that is heavy with data, essentially that all economics pieces are "little data points of human behavior," and it is our jobs to find that face to represent it.
But this surprising new page does bring up a good question, can journalism tips really be shared in five-minute bursts? I'm convinced most knowledge of this job, especially the important stuff, can only come from being out in the field doing the work. That definitely applies to citizen journalists as well. When Arianna Huffington from the Huffington Post goes on about the importance of people recording things like Obama's "Bitter-gate" and Kramer's...."racist-gate," events that created an uproar at the time but I barely remember now, it's not adding advice on how to get a job or how to improve journalism. Questions like that are not only much more important, they generally remain unanswered, a fact that keeps this channel from being something great.
To its credit, even the blander videos, like Katie Couric stating that a good interviewer is a gracious host, Tavis Smiley plugging his show to no end, Huffington rambling about citizen journalism and the always well-sourced Bob Woodward mentioning that a good day-of story requires nearly a dozen people and various documents, contribute just enough to make their five minute run times worthwhile.
There's a very good clip on there of an Associated Press reporter detailing how to pitch a story idea. Basically, he says you should have the main idea out in two sentences and be prepared for a flood of questions. The legwork must be done before the story is pitched, he adds. It seems like a majority of these clips are directed toward someone in his or her first year at a reporting gig, who just kind of stumbled into the job with little background on it.
I certainly hope the site continues, it really is a helpful resource for what it is, but I'm not sure who is benefiting. If the channel wants to expand, and it's clearly trying to make an impression with the big names featured right off the bat, then there absolutely needs to be more real issues discussed. Nicholas Kristof and Chris Cillizza are both geniuses, but their clips on doing stories internationally and not looking dumb on television, respectively, really aren't contributing much beyond plugs for their work. People in those positions, I would hope with their years of experience, already know what to do.
As with many fields, very little of journalism can be taught through instructional videos. Sure the page is a nice, free package of clips from experts for green reporters to wane through, but what was the point for everyone else?
-30-
Reporters give advice on a new YouTube Channel
Monday, June 29, 2009
Don't Think Twice, It's Alright.
In other Lancaster news, today is the first day in more than a century that my town will only produce one newspaper.
Instead of turning all "media reform" and idealistic on you, I'd like to point out that this is probably for the best. Sure, walking to Turkey Hill and choosing between the Intelligencer Journal, New Era and Lancaster Times (the fictional paper as seen in Weird Al's "Amish Paradise" music video), plus the sublime Philadelphia Inquirer and Harrisburg Patriot-News, would be fantastic. So would a puppy named "Scooter."
But in the real world, newspapers are shutting down across the country and my dad is allergic to puppies.
And so, here we are. Today marks the end of the Lancaster's New Era, an afternoon newspaper formed in 1877 to serve the über-Republican constituency of Lancaster County. It will be combined into the morning's Intelligencer Journal and that package will be delivered in the morning. (Full disclosure, just to be safe: I wrote for the "teen section" of the Intel for years and was a sports correspondent for the paper as well.)
Granted, its folding isn't surprising news. The announcement of this consolidation was made months ago, and both papers are owned by Lancaster Newspapers. Perhaps as a trial run, the Saturday edition had already been a joint publication between the two for a while now. Although both operate out of the same building, they maintained separate editorial departments. Odd as it was, it worked.
In the years I read it, the New Era served as exactly what residents expected a conservative newspaper to be. There were syndicated columns from the likes of Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin rotated in and out. Editorially, it was pretty ridiculous, but the stories were never overtly conservative. It suffered more so from the lack of reporters that limit the content of most local papers. In that sense, there's some good here.
As newspapers across the country continue to fold, it would be selfish to expect Lancaster to maintain two dailies. Much more important cities, like Boston, San Francisco, Miami, Atlanta and Chicago, are currently in drawn-out struggles to keep the lights on at their major newspapers, why should Lancaster avoid this awful fate?
Now, the two papers will be able to consolidate their resources and various other corporate jargon. The extra reporters working together will succeed especially well in this area; Lancaster County is full of small communities like Blue Ball, Intercourse and Bird-in-Hand that (obviously) have no other sources of local news. The fact that these papers are keeping separate opinion pages and editorial departments is what puts me at ease.
Yes, I did buy the last issue. Not so much as a keepsake, because the paper never meant much to me beyond its role as "another newspaper" in the county, but as an end of an era. (I am so sorry.) There was something really nice about saying my town does have two newspapers. And although both publications ran the obligatory pieces about how this is a big change, but not a goodbye, there were plenty of quotes included about how this is a shame. If they asked me, I simply would have said I won't miss the New Era, but I hope someone can step up and fill that role of "another paper."
Long live the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal/New Era. Wow, actually that looks really dumb. Let's just keep calling it the Intel.
-30-
New Era closes shop.
Instead of turning all "media reform" and idealistic on you, I'd like to point out that this is probably for the best. Sure, walking to Turkey Hill and choosing between the Intelligencer Journal, New Era and Lancaster Times (the fictional paper as seen in Weird Al's "Amish Paradise" music video), plus the sublime Philadelphia Inquirer and Harrisburg Patriot-News, would be fantastic. So would a puppy named "Scooter."
But in the real world, newspapers are shutting down across the country and my dad is allergic to puppies.
And so, here we are. Today marks the end of the Lancaster's New Era, an afternoon newspaper formed in 1877 to serve the über-Republican constituency of Lancaster County. It will be combined into the morning's Intelligencer Journal and that package will be delivered in the morning. (Full disclosure, just to be safe: I wrote for the "teen section" of the Intel for years and was a sports correspondent for the paper as well.)
Granted, its folding isn't surprising news. The announcement of this consolidation was made months ago, and both papers are owned by Lancaster Newspapers. Perhaps as a trial run, the Saturday edition had already been a joint publication between the two for a while now. Although both operate out of the same building, they maintained separate editorial departments. Odd as it was, it worked.
In the years I read it, the New Era served as exactly what residents expected a conservative newspaper to be. There were syndicated columns from the likes of Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin rotated in and out. Editorially, it was pretty ridiculous, but the stories were never overtly conservative. It suffered more so from the lack of reporters that limit the content of most local papers. In that sense, there's some good here.
As newspapers across the country continue to fold, it would be selfish to expect Lancaster to maintain two dailies. Much more important cities, like Boston, San Francisco, Miami, Atlanta and Chicago, are currently in drawn-out struggles to keep the lights on at their major newspapers, why should Lancaster avoid this awful fate?
Now, the two papers will be able to consolidate their resources and various other corporate jargon. The extra reporters working together will succeed especially well in this area; Lancaster County is full of small communities like Blue Ball, Intercourse and Bird-in-Hand that (obviously) have no other sources of local news. The fact that these papers are keeping separate opinion pages and editorial departments is what puts me at ease.
Yes, I did buy the last issue. Not so much as a keepsake, because the paper never meant much to me beyond its role as "another newspaper" in the county, but as an end of an era. (I am so sorry.) There was something really nice about saying my town does have two newspapers. And although both publications ran the obligatory pieces about how this is a big change, but not a goodbye, there were plenty of quotes included about how this is a shame. If they asked me, I simply would have said I won't miss the New Era, but I hope someone can step up and fill that role of "another paper."
Long live the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal/New Era. Wow, actually that looks really dumb. Let's just keep calling it the Intel.
-30-
New Era closes shop.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
It's Hard to be a Saint in the City
I'll admit I missed this story when it first broke, but caught up last week thanks to the Los Angeles Times and Keith Olbermann. Apparently, so did everyone else.
The News: Turns out my hometown of Lancaster, PA will soon have 165 closed-circuit TV cameras watching our four square miles of land. The total bill is about $3 million, mostly from private businesses and donors. In an LA Times story written by Bob Drogin last week, Lancaster is painted as a quaint locale lost in time (okay, you got us) that is now one of the most watched cities in the country.
Don't worry, there's the sufficient amount of creepiness in the story that one would hope for. One camera operator, Doug Winglewich, watched dozens of camera feeds in silence, waiting for the police scanner to announce an address near one of them.
From that, you get stuff like, "He called up another feed and focused on a woman sitting on the curb. 'You get to know people's faces," he said. "She's been arrested for prostitution.'"
Truthfully, I don't care very much about the surveillance because the cameras are watching public places and are funded mostly by private dollars. It's the funding that's the kicker; as Lancaster loses money with tourism falling across the board, dropping millions on security cameras would be ridiculous.
But as for the privacy part, well, these things are monitoring public streets. I don't see much of a difference between what they are recording and Google Street View. It's just another step in a direction we've been heading for years.
About 125 people showed up downtown for a protest of these cameras, but so what? City officials said before the national attention that few complained. It's fun to protest, but there are many more important topics. And is there anything else to put on signs than "1984"? There must be.
Regardless of personal paranoia and the insufferable "slippery slope" argument, I hope we can all agree on the brilliance of the story's conclusion. Thanks for these two 'graphs, Mr. Drogin.
"But Jack Bauer, owner of the city's largest beer and soft drink distributor, calls the network 'a great thing.' His store hasn't been robbed, he said, since four cameras went up nearby.
'There's nothing wrong with instilling fear,' he said."
Of course Jack Bauer will take whatever means necessary. American heroes deserve all the help they can get.
-30-
The Los Angeles Times story from last Sunday
A followup today on a city rally against the cameras, enjoyable if only for the "TalkBack" comments that always spiral out of control.
The News: Turns out my hometown of Lancaster, PA will soon have 165 closed-circuit TV cameras watching our four square miles of land. The total bill is about $3 million, mostly from private businesses and donors. In an LA Times story written by Bob Drogin last week, Lancaster is painted as a quaint locale lost in time (okay, you got us) that is now one of the most watched cities in the country.
Don't worry, there's the sufficient amount of creepiness in the story that one would hope for. One camera operator, Doug Winglewich, watched dozens of camera feeds in silence, waiting for the police scanner to announce an address near one of them.
From that, you get stuff like, "He called up another feed and focused on a woman sitting on the curb. 'You get to know people's faces," he said. "She's been arrested for prostitution.'"
Truthfully, I don't care very much about the surveillance because the cameras are watching public places and are funded mostly by private dollars. It's the funding that's the kicker; as Lancaster loses money with tourism falling across the board, dropping millions on security cameras would be ridiculous.
But as for the privacy part, well, these things are monitoring public streets. I don't see much of a difference between what they are recording and Google Street View. It's just another step in a direction we've been heading for years.
About 125 people showed up downtown for a protest of these cameras, but so what? City officials said before the national attention that few complained. It's fun to protest, but there are many more important topics. And is there anything else to put on signs than "1984"? There must be.
Regardless of personal paranoia and the insufferable "slippery slope" argument, I hope we can all agree on the brilliance of the story's conclusion. Thanks for these two 'graphs, Mr. Drogin.
"But Jack Bauer, owner of the city's largest beer and soft drink distributor, calls the network 'a great thing.' His store hasn't been robbed, he said, since four cameras went up nearby.
'There's nothing wrong with instilling fear,' he said."
Of course Jack Bauer will take whatever means necessary. American heroes deserve all the help they can get.
-30-
The Los Angeles Times story from last Sunday
A followup today on a city rally against the cameras, enjoyable if only for the "TalkBack" comments that always spiral out of control.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Hi there.
Like most works in progress, the title of this page came long before I had any use for it. Just a quick realizations that, yes, one of my favorite Dylan tracks sounds pretty similar to one of the media's nicknames ("Positively Fourth Street" vs the fourth estate).
Now that this blog is officially created, I'll lay out the expectations and goals. Consider this first post as essentially our syllabus week. You may leave early if you'd like.
There are so many loose ends we see on a daily basis as members of The Post that are too hard to bring together for print. Be it due to a lack of space or relevance, more daily happenings on campus deserve coverage that they aren't seeing. Ideally with some regularity I will contribute my opinion on media coverage as well. As for weighing in on national topics, I'll try to spare you guys from overdoing it.
I'm a bit unsure how far this will go, but we'll see. I've spent $10 on dumber things, after all.
Now that this blog is officially created, I'll lay out the expectations and goals. Consider this first post as essentially our syllabus week. You may leave early if you'd like.
There are so many loose ends we see on a daily basis as members of The Post that are too hard to bring together for print. Be it due to a lack of space or relevance, more daily happenings on campus deserve coverage that they aren't seeing. Ideally with some regularity I will contribute my opinion on media coverage as well. As for weighing in on national topics, I'll try to spare you guys from overdoing it.
I'm a bit unsure how far this will go, but we'll see. I've spent $10 on dumber things, after all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
