 |
- For reports on their work experiences, check out Summer in London ‘09: Life at Work.
- For reports on their cultural and day-to-day lives, read Summer in London ’09: Life in London.
- To read about the 2009 program, check out Summer in London ‘09.
Students’ reflections on media:
Challenging media to improve, by Nick CusackSports writing across the pond, by Zina Kumok
Twitter-ific British media, by Amanda Ross
Letting old habits die, by Rachel Stark
Where has music coverage gone? by Katherine Hagan
Can MJ make The Sun set? by Brooke Lichtman
The love of newspapers, by Elvia Malagon
Bringing home a broader view of news, by Sarah Hutchins
A news junkie’s paradise, by Sam Mooney
Chipping away, by Sarah Brubeck
Specialize, and follow your passion, by CJ Lotz
What happened to Act II? by Courtney Miller
Hooked on the Guardian, by Zach Schalk
Beware, but mostly, be aware, by Jessica Haney
Ads on the front page? Effective! by Alex Farris
Why can’t we be friends? by Kelsey McArdle
In defense of The Sun, by Sam Leffers
Comparing Brit and U.S. reporting, by Sarah Brubeck
Visiting Al Jazeera, by Caitlin Johnston
Counting my journalistic blessings, by Katie Fay
Challenging media to improve
By Nick CusackJuly 21, 2009
During our eight-week visit, we went to the UK’s own state sponsored media network, the British Broadcasting Corporation. Two senior BBC staffers showed us a slideshow and gave us a tour of the Television Centre, where the BBC television news magic happens.
In the presentation, they talked about the BBC College of Journalism, a Web site designed to train BBC reporters and other staff. It will be available to the world in a few months. The college came to be after a BBC reporter said just before the Iraq war that the government fabricated documents that said Iraq could easily launch a biological attack. The reporter was probably in the right on that one, but this charge didn’t stop the government from forcing the retirement of top BBC execs. The public puts the BBC under constant pressure, and some strongly believe they should stop paying the license fee every TV watching family must pay, the one that keeps the BBC alive.
BBC editors figured it was about time to force the staff to undergo yearly training in media law and other disciplines to prevent blunders big and small, to keep the public trust. But, the BBC provides resources for staffers to go beyond the minimum to help them become the best they can be. Thus came the College of Journalism.
Fiona, who presented the slideshow, is a coach at the BBC, someone who helps people improve their writing and their multimedia skills, and the type who would die of embarrassment if someone found a tiny comma error in the presentation. It was inspiring to learn that some of the world’s greatest reporters seek to improve their writing. Some of the world’s best journalists had to look in on themselves and say, I could be better. I believe if you start to challenge yourself to become better in a subject as touchy and difficult as writing, you start to challenge everything. You get offended when people glorify Barack Obama or when people glorify conservatism. You repeat over and over the phrase “yeah, but…”
I asked Fiona if she got resistance from people she tried to help. Yes, of course, she said. Well, I asked, how do you get around it? You have to share your passion, she said.
“You just have to stay positive,” she said. “Motivate your team.”
It was refreshing. The other British media we visited — Reuters, the Guardian and Al Jazeera — all have great writers and reporters. They never mentioned struggling to get better, though. In fact, they seemed kind of smug, like they had it figured out. They had their political views figured out, even if it was no political view, such as with Reuters. They even agreed on how to have civil discussion on things they didn’t yet agree on. None of these news organizations have as much public scrutiny as the BBC. What is pushing them to get better, to learn? These other organizations, especially the Guardian, write so aggressively, so sharply, in a way that challenges and gets people talking. But, who is working to make them better and who is challenging their own views?
BBC editors figured it was about time to force the staff to undergo yearly training in media law and other disciplines to prevent blunders big and small, to keep the public trust. But, the BBC provides resources for staffers to go beyond the minimum to help them become the best they can be. Thus came the College of Journalism.
Fiona, who presented the slideshow, is a coach at the BBC, someone who helps people improve their writing and their multimedia skills, and the type who would die of embarrassment if someone found a tiny comma error in the presentation. It was inspiring to learn that some of the world’s greatest reporters seek to improve their writing. Some of the world’s best journalists had to look in on themselves and say, I could be better. I believe if you start to challenge yourself to become better in a subject as touchy and difficult as writing, you start to challenge everything. You get offended when people glorify Barack Obama or when people glorify conservatism. You repeat over and over the phrase “yeah, but…”
I asked Fiona if she got resistance from people she tried to help. Yes, of course, she said. Well, I asked, how do you get around it? You have to share your passion, she said.
“You just have to stay positive,” she said. “Motivate your team.”
It was refreshing. The other British media we visited — Reuters, the Guardian and Al Jazeera — all have great writers and reporters. They never mentioned struggling to get better, though. In fact, they seemed kind of smug, like they had it figured out. They had their political views figured out, even if it was no political view, such as with Reuters. They even agreed on how to have civil discussion on things they didn’t yet agree on. None of these news organizations have as much public scrutiny as the BBC. What is pushing them to get better, to learn? These other organizations, especially the Guardian, write so aggressively, so sharply, in a way that challenges and gets people talking. But, who is working to make them better and who is challenging their own views?
Sports writing across the pond
By Zina KumokJuly 13, 2009
As an aspiring sports writer, I have always loved comparing various publications. When I came to London, I was eager to see how English and American sports coverage differed.
A few things I’ve noticed: while Americans tend to rely on ESPN.com, Yahoo! Sports or live blogs for coverage of live games, there seems to be less of the ADD-like obsession with sports. Not to say that the British don’t care about sports, but their coverage isn’t as extensive or minute as ESPN’s is.
Most newspapers have live blogs during games. But here they tend to blog normally, updating every few minutes or so. I was so frazzled by this originally. I expected to get up-to-the-minute coverage about everything, not have to wait almost 60 seconds for the latest results.
When I was at work and trying to get information about Wimbledon, I went to a few newspaper Web sites, hoping to find current scores. Eventually, I found the official Wimbledon site, which had a reliable and up-to-the-minute game tracker. I realized how Americans take for granted the pressure on media outlets to provide lightning fast results to their audiences.
But despite the technological differences, they still cover every aspect of their favorite players. When Tottenham Spurs star Ledley King was arrested for assaulting a doorman, coverage of the event was in every major newspaper and media outlet. When Ronaldo signed a record contract with Real Madrid, the lead headline in every sports section that day was about his multimillion dollar offer.
While Americans care about football, basketball and baseball, the British have a similar, if not greater frenzy, for cricket, soccer and rugby. But their passions are also more nationalistic, as their major sports frequently compete in international competition. This creates a different atmosphere than in the U.S., where most teams play for their country only during the Olympics.
Another major difference has been the writing styles. I noticed more clichés and sensationalist writing in Britain. Also, because the U.K. has such a strong newspaper culture, there seems to be more competition to grab the reader’s attention. While readers in the U.S. gravitate toward ESPN or the team’s local newspaper for coverage, English newspapers are responsible for every team.
There’s a similar focus on sports blogs and columns. Both British and American news outlets feature commentary on various sports. And just as they are in the U.S., columnists were just as opinionated about their country’s sports stars.
Even though it took me some time to adjust to these differences, I began to appreciate the fervor that the English have for their sports and the quality of writing I saw. Who knows, maybe one day I’ll be joining the English in covering their local sports.
Most newspapers have live blogs during games. But here they tend to blog normally, updating every few minutes or so. I was so frazzled by this originally. I expected to get up-to-the-minute coverage about everything, not have to wait almost 60 seconds for the latest results.
When I was at work and trying to get information about Wimbledon, I went to a few newspaper Web sites, hoping to find current scores. Eventually, I found the official Wimbledon site, which had a reliable and up-to-the-minute game tracker. I realized how Americans take for granted the pressure on media outlets to provide lightning fast results to their audiences.
But despite the technological differences, they still cover every aspect of their favorite players. When Tottenham Spurs star Ledley King was arrested for assaulting a doorman, coverage of the event was in every major newspaper and media outlet. When Ronaldo signed a record contract with Real Madrid, the lead headline in every sports section that day was about his multimillion dollar offer.
While Americans care about football, basketball and baseball, the British have a similar, if not greater frenzy, for cricket, soccer and rugby. But their passions are also more nationalistic, as their major sports frequently compete in international competition. This creates a different atmosphere than in the U.S., where most teams play for their country only during the Olympics.
Another major difference has been the writing styles. I noticed more clichés and sensationalist writing in Britain. Also, because the U.K. has such a strong newspaper culture, there seems to be more competition to grab the reader’s attention. While readers in the U.S. gravitate toward ESPN or the team’s local newspaper for coverage, English newspapers are responsible for every team.
There’s a similar focus on sports blogs and columns. Both British and American news outlets feature commentary on various sports. And just as they are in the U.S., columnists were just as opinionated about their country’s sports stars.
Even though it took me some time to adjust to these differences, I began to appreciate the fervor that the English have for their sports and the quality of writing I saw. Who knows, maybe one day I’ll be joining the English in covering their local sports.
Twitter-rific British media
By Amanda RossJuly 10, 2009
Twitter. We all know it’s the new “it” form of communicating. From “just washed the dogs!” to an “RT” (re-tweet) of someone else’s genius post, everyone who’s anyone has got a Twitter, including all the major outlets in British media.
I recently “tweetified” myself and began looking up others whom I could follow. My first pick? The Guardian, my newspaper of choice while in London. Now that I’m home, checking my Guardian tweets is an essential part of my day. They always show up in a quick, to-the-point blurb, with a convenient link attached. Many, many times a day. For example, a recent Guardian tweet:
guardiannews: Three nights of riots in French town after 21-year-old dies in police custody http://bit.ly/uVMB3
The link is changed to fit the 140-character Twitter limit, but the number of tweets that pour out of the Guardian’s office is overwhelming, usually 20 to 40 top headlines each day.
My newfound thirst for British media is quenched easily. Since I worked at a PR firm, we received every newspaper published in the greater London area to scour for news pertaining to our clients. I was always sure to read the Guardian and the Times. These two newspapers, especially the Guardian, are some of the most trusted in the country. And with its USA Today-esque, reader-friendly layout, the Guardian was the perfect paper for me. I loved it.
And now that I’m home, happily sleeping until noon and faced with reading the Cincinnati Enquirer with my morning cereal, I couldn’t be more grateful for the new fad in social networking. It just so happens that the Enquirer even laid off 100 of its Cincinnati-based staff just last Wednesday. Its Twitter has 1,989 followers. I am not one of them.
On the other hand, the Guardian has 26,552 followers. Of course, the Guardian is a national paper in a country where print is still the popular medium, but one can’t help but look at these numbers as a testament to the quality of writing and coverage that can be found in each paper.
Nowadays, as I sit on the less classy side of the pond with my Enquirer in hand, I am nostalgic for the big, thick and wonderfully written papers of Britain. I get a twinge of sadness as I press the “refresh” button on my browser in the hopes of seeing a new crop of Guardian headlines appear on my Twitter.
I am glad that in a rare moment of FOMO (fear of missing out), I went ahead and “tweetified” myself, for I fear I would be sadly lost without a feed of my favorite British newspaper that I had free in my hands just weeks ago. I miss the feel of that real newspaper, a newspaper that actually meant something. But luckily, a social network that I was once skeptical about is now my Web site of choice for excellent news coverage each morning.
Now that I am no longer a media-crazed London resident, the next step is finding something even moderately interesting to tweet about myself.
guardiannews: Three nights of riots in French town after 21-year-old dies in police custody http://bit.ly/uVMB3
The link is changed to fit the 140-character Twitter limit, but the number of tweets that pour out of the Guardian’s office is overwhelming, usually 20 to 40 top headlines each day.
My newfound thirst for British media is quenched easily. Since I worked at a PR firm, we received every newspaper published in the greater London area to scour for news pertaining to our clients. I was always sure to read the Guardian and the Times. These two newspapers, especially the Guardian, are some of the most trusted in the country. And with its USA Today-esque, reader-friendly layout, the Guardian was the perfect paper for me. I loved it.
And now that I’m home, happily sleeping until noon and faced with reading the Cincinnati Enquirer with my morning cereal, I couldn’t be more grateful for the new fad in social networking. It just so happens that the Enquirer even laid off 100 of its Cincinnati-based staff just last Wednesday. Its Twitter has 1,989 followers. I am not one of them.
On the other hand, the Guardian has 26,552 followers. Of course, the Guardian is a national paper in a country where print is still the popular medium, but one can’t help but look at these numbers as a testament to the quality of writing and coverage that can be found in each paper.
Nowadays, as I sit on the less classy side of the pond with my Enquirer in hand, I am nostalgic for the big, thick and wonderfully written papers of Britain. I get a twinge of sadness as I press the “refresh” button on my browser in the hopes of seeing a new crop of Guardian headlines appear on my Twitter.
I am glad that in a rare moment of FOMO (fear of missing out), I went ahead and “tweetified” myself, for I fear I would be sadly lost without a feed of my favorite British newspaper that I had free in my hands just weeks ago. I miss the feel of that real newspaper, a newspaper that actually meant something. But luckily, a social network that I was once skeptical about is now my Web site of choice for excellent news coverage each morning.
Now that I am no longer a media-crazed London resident, the next step is finding something even moderately interesting to tweet about myself.
Letting old habits die
By Rachel StarkJuly 2, 2009
When fellow classmate Caitlin Johnston and I asked a local to share his view of Americans, a worried look crossed his face.
“Honestly?” He hesitated, clearly contemplating whether to tell the truth.
After further prodding, he gave us the answer we were expecting. In his eyes, Americans are ignorant and self-absorbed; we could care less about the problems of the rest of the world.
The local quickly tried to mend any damages caused by his brutal honesty by adding that the two of us had proved this stereotype wrong, but that is beside the point. The fact is that the rest of the world often labels Americans as uninformed and disinterested to the daily problems citizens of other countries face. And while such a blanket statement is not accurate or fair to apply to all Americans, I’ll admit that it comes close to describing the way I went about gathering international news prior to this trip.
Before, I’d skim the headlines of major news organizations like CNN and the New York Times daily, guilty of stopping to read only the quirky stories or reports that interested me. These often did not include stories involving killings and war. I’m not sure whether it was my lack of background knowledge on many of these harder-hitting issues or my subconscious desire to avoid the horrors that others faced, but I got a much needed wake-up call through my time spent in London, in our class, and at the international news organizations we visited.
In our class, International News and Reporting, we have discussed Susan Moeller’s Four Habits of International New Reporting, an analysis of the typical American way of reporting. She mentions formulaic coverage, sensationalized language, analogies and metaphors to past influential events, and an obvious American connection as tactics reporters use to appeal to the American audience.
These habits are not meant to be negative and are even inevitable at times. But it makes me think – why does a story have to relate back to Americans to be worth our time? If the state of emergency in Somalia has no possible tie to the lives of Americans, is it OK for it to slip by unnoticed? Why do stories in South America, Africa and much of Asia often get pushed aside?
I cannot say whether the nature of international news coverage in America is more determined by media consumers like me or news organizations that provide the stories. I can say, though, that I am grateful to now be equipped with the tools and awareness needed to seek out the best coverage of the events affecting the people with whom we share this world. I now know better than to settle with one report from CNN or the New York Times. From Al Jazeera to the 24-hour African news network A24, The Guardian to the BBC, different perspectives can be gained through news organizations around the world.
I will head home this weekend to a place I am comfortable with, slipping back into my old routines and enjoying the company of loved ones. But I am determined to let my old habit of seeking out limited international news die hard.
The local quickly tried to mend any damages caused by his brutal honesty by adding that the two of us had proved this stereotype wrong, but that is beside the point. The fact is that the rest of the world often labels Americans as uninformed and disinterested to the daily problems citizens of other countries face. And while such a blanket statement is not accurate or fair to apply to all Americans, I’ll admit that it comes close to describing the way I went about gathering international news prior to this trip.
Before, I’d skim the headlines of major news organizations like CNN and the New York Times daily, guilty of stopping to read only the quirky stories or reports that interested me. These often did not include stories involving killings and war. I’m not sure whether it was my lack of background knowledge on many of these harder-hitting issues or my subconscious desire to avoid the horrors that others faced, but I got a much needed wake-up call through my time spent in London, in our class, and at the international news organizations we visited.
In our class, International News and Reporting, we have discussed Susan Moeller’s Four Habits of International New Reporting, an analysis of the typical American way of reporting. She mentions formulaic coverage, sensationalized language, analogies and metaphors to past influential events, and an obvious American connection as tactics reporters use to appeal to the American audience.
These habits are not meant to be negative and are even inevitable at times. But it makes me think – why does a story have to relate back to Americans to be worth our time? If the state of emergency in Somalia has no possible tie to the lives of Americans, is it OK for it to slip by unnoticed? Why do stories in South America, Africa and much of Asia often get pushed aside?
I cannot say whether the nature of international news coverage in America is more determined by media consumers like me or news organizations that provide the stories. I can say, though, that I am grateful to now be equipped with the tools and awareness needed to seek out the best coverage of the events affecting the people with whom we share this world. I now know better than to settle with one report from CNN or the New York Times. From Al Jazeera to the 24-hour African news network A24, The Guardian to the BBC, different perspectives can be gained through news organizations around the world.
I will head home this weekend to a place I am comfortable with, slipping back into my old routines and enjoying the company of loved ones. But I am determined to let my old habit of seeking out limited international news die hard.
Where has music coverage gone?
By Katherine HaganJuly 2, 2009
Classical music is a business in America. It suffers in an economic downturn as any other business does. Orchestras and opera houses close and go bankrupt right and left.
Classical music is a charity in Britain. It gets bailed out by the government and promoted like crazy for the most part. The mayor here is even putting pianos all around the city for public use.
Coverage of the future of classical music in America has increased marginally in arts sections in newspapers. Here in Britain, classical music coverage does not appear in papers, with the exception of The Guardian and sometimes The Independent, and is hidden online. Previews have been reduced to listings. Reviews are rarely written. Photographers do not take photos of classical music events unless celebrities appear, in which case the photos are of the celeb, not the performance. British coverage of the classical music industry, its effect on the economy and its future in modern society extends to a few blogs and op eds posted online only.
It is a given that the percentage of Brits who care about classical music is much higher in comparison to Americans, simply because the classical arts have been longer standing in British culture and European culture in general. So why have American newspapers managed to find the space and time to report about the industry, yet British newspapers’ coverage has diminished to a few blogs and listings?
I cannot explain their exact thought processes, but my guess is that Brits have become spoiled when it comes to classical music. They have always had ample access to it and have come to underappreciate it. Why cover an orchestra’s revolutionary involvement teaching the concept of music to students in deaf schools in London when you can use the space to write about Peaches’ newest way of pissing off her father?
Why cover the world premiere of an up-and-coming composer’s first work when you can use the space to write about Lilly Allen wearing a gray wig at an unremarkable performance?
Why cover an orchestra’s collaboration with sports teams around the community where the Olympics will take place in 2012 when you can use the space to write about yet another U2 concert on the band’s regular tour?
As one of millions who love the classical arts, I can definitively say British coverage of the arts is disappointing and sad. What is worse is that I do not think change is in its future. Depressing.
It is a given that the percentage of Brits who care about classical music is much higher in comparison to Americans, simply because the classical arts have been longer standing in British culture and European culture in general. So why have American newspapers managed to find the space and time to report about the industry, yet British newspapers’ coverage has diminished to a few blogs and listings?
I cannot explain their exact thought processes, but my guess is that Brits have become spoiled when it comes to classical music. They have always had ample access to it and have come to underappreciate it. Why cover an orchestra’s revolutionary involvement teaching the concept of music to students in deaf schools in London when you can use the space to write about Peaches’ newest way of pissing off her father?
Why cover the world premiere of an up-and-coming composer’s first work when you can use the space to write about Lilly Allen wearing a gray wig at an unremarkable performance?
Why cover an orchestra’s collaboration with sports teams around the community where the Olympics will take place in 2012 when you can use the space to write about yet another U2 concert on the band’s regular tour?
As one of millions who love the classical arts, I can definitively say British coverage of the arts is disappointing and sad. What is worse is that I do not think change is in its future. Depressing.
Can MJ make The Sun set?
By Brooke LichtmanJuly 2, 2009
The Sun, a daily tabloid published in the U.K. and Ireland, has the highest circulation of any English-language newspaper in the world. Some may say it is best known for its juicy celeb gossip, flashy tabloid headlines and infamous “page three girls.”
However, it is far more influential than one may think. The Sun is known to have swung political elections, boosted nobodies to stardom and ruined reputations, all with a few shocking headlines, witty columns and scandalous pictures. Despite it having a “bad rep,” The Sun has turned up some serious heat around the world.
Like the rest of media outlets, The Sun has capitalized on the death of the world’s King of Pop, Michael Jackson, as it has since he moonwalked through those pearly gates. This comes as no surprise to most, as the MJ story has “sensationalize me” potential — a.k.a. Sun news story potential. He was loved and idolized around the world and especially adored by many Sun readers. Hence, the boy who never grew up has graced the front pages of The Sun since he passed and is still creating breaking news controversies even after his death.
The controversy began this past Monday when The Sun published what it claimed as “leaked information” on Jackson’s autopsy results. According to the paper, the king of pop weighed a mere 112 pounds; had no food but only partially-digested pills in his stomach; was bald; was bruised all over; had several broken ribs and multiple injection marks on his body.
It quoted “a source close to the Jackson entourage,” who said, “He was skin and bone, his hair had fallen out and had been eating nothing but pills when he died. Injection marks all over his body and the disfigurement caused by years of plastic surgery show he’d been in terminal decline for years. His doctors and the hangers-on stood by as he self-destructed. Somebody is going to have to pay.”
Other than this mysterious source, the story lacks any other substantial quotes from anyone. The pathologists who supposedly performed the autopsy are mentioned, but only directly quoted in the story twice, and only four words: “peach fuzz” and “severely emaciated.”
Since this story has been published, several sources have called out The Sun, claiming the autopsy story is a total fabrication. TMZ, the blog that first announced MJ’s death, said the data used and published by The Sun newspaper was false. Furthermore, the L.A. coroner’s office, which performed the autopsy, denied the report and said “It is not from our office. We do not know where this information came from, but it is not accurate and is completely false.”
Not only are other media outlets contradicting the story, The Sun itself has published stories about the pop star and his final days that seem to contradict its own stories. The Sun published a story the very next day with a headline that read, “Full of Life, Just 2 Days from Death.” It seems pretty illogical to me to think that someone can go from “full of life” to severely emaciated, bald and bruised in just 48 hours.
So what’s true and what’s false here? As of now, that debate is still up in the air and The Sun has made no comment backing up its story or any effort to shoot down naysayers. However, the truth always does seem to come out and at the end of the day, if in fact the story published in The Sun is false, leave it to the King of Pop to open a whole new Pandora’s box of controversy. Stay tuned, we could be in for a great Sun set.
Like the rest of media outlets, The Sun has capitalized on the death of the world’s King of Pop, Michael Jackson, as it has since he moonwalked through those pearly gates. This comes as no surprise to most, as the MJ story has “sensationalize me” potential — a.k.a. Sun news story potential. He was loved and idolized around the world and especially adored by many Sun readers. Hence, the boy who never grew up has graced the front pages of The Sun since he passed and is still creating breaking news controversies even after his death.
The controversy began this past Monday when The Sun published what it claimed as “leaked information” on Jackson’s autopsy results. According to the paper, the king of pop weighed a mere 112 pounds; had no food but only partially-digested pills in his stomach; was bald; was bruised all over; had several broken ribs and multiple injection marks on his body.
It quoted “a source close to the Jackson entourage,” who said, “He was skin and bone, his hair had fallen out and had been eating nothing but pills when he died. Injection marks all over his body and the disfigurement caused by years of plastic surgery show he’d been in terminal decline for years. His doctors and the hangers-on stood by as he self-destructed. Somebody is going to have to pay.”
Other than this mysterious source, the story lacks any other substantial quotes from anyone. The pathologists who supposedly performed the autopsy are mentioned, but only directly quoted in the story twice, and only four words: “peach fuzz” and “severely emaciated.”
Since this story has been published, several sources have called out The Sun, claiming the autopsy story is a total fabrication. TMZ, the blog that first announced MJ’s death, said the data used and published by The Sun newspaper was false. Furthermore, the L.A. coroner’s office, which performed the autopsy, denied the report and said “It is not from our office. We do not know where this information came from, but it is not accurate and is completely false.”
Not only are other media outlets contradicting the story, The Sun itself has published stories about the pop star and his final days that seem to contradict its own stories. The Sun published a story the very next day with a headline that read, “Full of Life, Just 2 Days from Death.” It seems pretty illogical to me to think that someone can go from “full of life” to severely emaciated, bald and bruised in just 48 hours.
So what’s true and what’s false here? As of now, that debate is still up in the air and The Sun has made no comment backing up its story or any effort to shoot down naysayers. However, the truth always does seem to come out and at the end of the day, if in fact the story published in The Sun is false, leave it to the King of Pop to open a whole new Pandora’s box of controversy. Stay tuned, we could be in for a great Sun set.
The love of newspapers
By Elvia MalagonJuly 1, 2009
My first couple of days in London, I felt this city was a journalist’s dream come true: everyone was reading newspapers.
However, I soon found this was because these tabloid newspapers were free and not considered to be “quality” newspapers. Still, there was hope in the fact that the United Kingdom has more national newspapers than the United States, each with a different political leaning.
When it comes down to it, these newspapers might look a little different and spell a few words differently but both face the biggest obstacle – not dying.
Is journalism thriving anywhere? This is a question I have been battling with like a daily nightmare. I’ve learned that in order to answer this question, you first have to define thriving.
We were lucky to be in the U.K. when the biggest story broke: the Daily Telegraph bought access to all of the MP’s expenses and released the information. These stories took over the U.K. and led to the speaker of the house stepping down.
Just yesterday, I went to the Frontline Club to sit in on a discussion that featured four journalists who recently came back from Iran. There, too, I saw journalism thriving. After all, post-election Iran was by far one of the biggest stories of the year because of journalists who reported on it.
London isn’t the only city proving everyone wrong about journalism. The Chicago Tribune has recently had a series of stories about how politicians used their power to get students who weren’t qualified into University of Illinois.
After media visits to places such as the Guardian and Reuters, it’s clear that they are getting a lot of great content and have more people read them than ever. At the Guardian, one of the editors talked to the group about how editors have been rethinking who their audience is online because most of the people who visit the Web site aren’t from Britain, as opposed to the group who read the print version.
It’s clear that the longing for news is real but there just isn’t a business model uses this to its best advantage.
I thought I might be able to find the answer for this in London. I was wrong. British newspapers might have more of a kick to them but they are as lost and confused as the American papers.
So once again I am at square one.
I do know that this summer would have boring if it weren’t for the journalists reporting on everything from MP’s expenses to the protests in Iran to the death of a musical icon.
I don’t know how I, a “journalist,” will fit into the formula in the future, but I do know that I am prepared to force myself in.
Is journalism thriving anywhere? This is a question I have been battling with like a daily nightmare. I’ve learned that in order to answer this question, you first have to define thriving.
We were lucky to be in the U.K. when the biggest story broke: the Daily Telegraph bought access to all of the MP’s expenses and released the information. These stories took over the U.K. and led to the speaker of the house stepping down.
Just yesterday, I went to the Frontline Club to sit in on a discussion that featured four journalists who recently came back from Iran. There, too, I saw journalism thriving. After all, post-election Iran was by far one of the biggest stories of the year because of journalists who reported on it.
London isn’t the only city proving everyone wrong about journalism. The Chicago Tribune has recently had a series of stories about how politicians used their power to get students who weren’t qualified into University of Illinois.
After media visits to places such as the Guardian and Reuters, it’s clear that they are getting a lot of great content and have more people read them than ever. At the Guardian, one of the editors talked to the group about how editors have been rethinking who their audience is online because most of the people who visit the Web site aren’t from Britain, as opposed to the group who read the print version.
It’s clear that the longing for news is real but there just isn’t a business model uses this to its best advantage.
I thought I might be able to find the answer for this in London. I was wrong. British newspapers might have more of a kick to them but they are as lost and confused as the American papers.
So once again I am at square one.
I do know that this summer would have boring if it weren’t for the journalists reporting on everything from MP’s expenses to the protests in Iran to the death of a musical icon.
I don’t know how I, a “journalist,” will fit into the formula in the future, but I do know that I am prepared to force myself in.
Bringing home a broader view of news
By Sarah HutchinsJuly 1, 2009
As my final days in London draw near, I would like to take a couple hundred words to think back on some of my first impressions of British media.
After crossing the pond, the first newspaper I looked at was the Guardian. I would love to say that I picked the Guardian because I knew the inherent nuances of the paper’s coverage and admired it’s center-left bias. But that wasn’t the case.
 |
| Courtesy photo |
| Sarah Hutchins is working at In-Store News this summer. One of her assignments was to write a feature on how retailers can use mobiles to increase sales. |
As a media connoisseur, I will admit that I have grown and learned a lot in London. I learned about the biases most British newspapers have and the audiences they cater to. I learned about the different new media forms on the rise around the world and the importance of looking at coverage of the same issue in different publications.
Back home I was a creature of habit. I read the same publications, in almost the same order, every single day. I checked the IDS, CNN, New York Times and my hometown paper every morning and regularly throughout the day. I thought I was reading a diverse amount of coverage. That couldn’t have been further from the truth.
Living in a different country has taught me to follow a variety of media outlets for my news. It’s not enough to read a local and national paper every day. As journalists, and even just as informed citizens, we must check all kinds of media to get a complete picture of the news. Looking at a variety of newspapers is a good start, but it is only the tip of the iceberg. Web sites like Al Jazeera and foreign newscasts like France 24 and Press TV provide a different outlook on international issues. Blogs—professional and amateur—and Twitter are new tools for following issues in the news, too.
I’m not saying that people in London are better informed and are better media consumers. In fact, from what I have seen, they are just as guilty of reading the same one or two publications every day. Perhaps if they came to America they would have an epiphany, too.
Studying foreign media has been a catalyst for viewing journalism in a new light. Good reporting extends beyond the borders of our home community, state and nation. In fact, based on my research of some foreign issues, American publications often do the worst job covering international news. But in order to be well informed we must push ourselves beyond our comfort zones.
By now, British newspapers don’t feel so overwhelming. Now I simply see the different publications as some of the many places I can turn for my news. I will probably always favor the Guardian, but now I will not limit myself to simply one publication for news about Britain.
I am looking forward to returning to the familiar publications I read at home, but I will return with a whole new morning reading routine. I guess I’ll just have to set my alarm clock a little earlier.
A news junkie’s paradise
By Sam MooneyJuly 1, 2009
When I’m sitting at home, either in Avon or Bloomington, I don’t have very many options when it comes to where I get my news. Taking the Internet out of the equation in this instance (as it would completely void everything I’m about to write, and to be frank, I’m much more partial to newspapers and broadcast news anyway), I’m left with a couple newspapers and a few television stations.
When I’m in my hometown of Avon, I have the Indianapolis Star, in serious decline over the past few years, and The Hendricks County Flyer, adequate enough for a local county paper (though seriously lacking in editing proficiency, to be quite honest). Then, there’s television. Growing up without cable or satellite (really, how did I survive?), I was left with the local NBC, CBS, and ABC affiliates (I like to pretend the Fox affiliate doesn’t exist – no political bias here. It’s just terrible). And they only gave me news in the wee hours of the morning, in the evening and late at night. In other words, I’m a bit disadvantaged when it comes to receiving news.
In Bloomington, the situation is only slightly better. I’m given the option of getting a free copy of The New York Times and USA Today on a daily basis, and there’s the Indiana Daily Student. Plus, I have cable in my apartment, so that opens me up to 24-hour news channels such as CNN, MSNBC and Fox. But I still feel like there’s something lacking. I needed more.
Then I came to London for eight weeks. I didn’t know where to start. The Guardian was my newspaper of choice for the first few weeks, but since then, I’ve varied my newspaper intake everyday: The Sun if I’m feeling cheap or want flashy, sensational news; The Financial Times if I want to be bored; The Independent if I want a fresh perspective; or The Daily Mail if it comes with a free Wimbledon highlights DVD while I’m waiting to get into the tennis championships.
I’ve read just about every major British newspaper that is sold at a newsagent’s stand. And I love each and every one of them. Regardless of my political bias, I love the many different options when it comes to getting news. I feel so much better informed than I do when I’m in Indiana (granted, I have no idea what’s going on the United States right now, but at least I know who the new Commons Speaker is!).
Then there’s television. BBC has four different channels and a 24-hour news station. There’s Sky News, struggling to gain viewers from BBC, but interesting and informative nonetheless. And there’s Channel 4, which quite possibly has my favorite evening newscasts of all time.
Not to knock news reporting in the United States, but I think Britain’s got us beat. When I get back to Indiana and am stuck with The Indianapolis Star and CNN, I’ll certainly miss The Guardian and Channel 4. But at least I’ll have the Internet to check them out at my leisure.
In Bloomington, the situation is only slightly better. I’m given the option of getting a free copy of The New York Times and USA Today on a daily basis, and there’s the Indiana Daily Student. Plus, I have cable in my apartment, so that opens me up to 24-hour news channels such as CNN, MSNBC and Fox. But I still feel like there’s something lacking. I needed more.
Then I came to London for eight weeks. I didn’t know where to start. The Guardian was my newspaper of choice for the first few weeks, but since then, I’ve varied my newspaper intake everyday: The Sun if I’m feeling cheap or want flashy, sensational news; The Financial Times if I want to be bored; The Independent if I want a fresh perspective; or The Daily Mail if it comes with a free Wimbledon highlights DVD while I’m waiting to get into the tennis championships.
I’ve read just about every major British newspaper that is sold at a newsagent’s stand. And I love each and every one of them. Regardless of my political bias, I love the many different options when it comes to getting news. I feel so much better informed than I do when I’m in Indiana (granted, I have no idea what’s going on the United States right now, but at least I know who the new Commons Speaker is!).
Then there’s television. BBC has four different channels and a 24-hour news station. There’s Sky News, struggling to gain viewers from BBC, but interesting and informative nonetheless. And there’s Channel 4, which quite possibly has my favorite evening newscasts of all time.
Not to knock news reporting in the United States, but I think Britain’s got us beat. When I get back to Indiana and am stuck with The Indianapolis Star and CNN, I’ll certainly miss The Guardian and Channel 4. But at least I’ll have the Internet to check them out at my leisure.
Chipping away
By Sarah BrubeckJune 29, 2009
There are four fewer people working in my office today.
It seems layoffs follow me wherever I go. This summer, four people from my internship left last week, and last summer there were major cuts at the daily where I worked. Maybe it’s bad luck or maybe it’s God saying “get out of journalism before it’s too late.”
This summer, two of my former coworkers are going on to other London newspapers while the other two journalists’ futures are up in the air. It doesn’t matter which continent you’re on, regional papers struggle.
What’s really disappointing about this situation is the content of the news. With three fewer reporters and one fewer editor, the amount of Web updates already are suffering and the size of the paper has decreased. This means less time for investigative stories and less room for stories. Therefore, many stories are missed.
When I first arrived, there were five fulltime reporters and now there are two, and this change happened overnight.
When I first arrived, there were three Web updates a day. There hasn’t been a Web update in days. Though I work at a weekly, the staff still runs daily meetings to discuss coverage and how far along reporters are on their stories. We haven’t had a news meeting in days.
This isn’t the fault of the staff, it’s the fault of the downsizing. It’s scary to think that this regional paper could cease to exist, just as the daily I worked for last summer could cease to exist.
Some argue that a regional newspaper is no longer needed, that national media does it better. Why do you need the Northwest London Newspapers when you have The Guardian and the Daily Telegraph?
Regional papers matter because when you Google Wayne Freckleton, a serial killer who was shot in the head while waiting in line at a barber shop, the only stories that come up about his trial come from the Northwest London Newspapers and the BBC, and the BBC story is only three graphs. I’m sure I sound like a PR representative for the Northwest London Newspapers, but I’m not. I just believe in newspapers.
The scary thing is, three of the four reporters who no longer work here are in their mid to late 20s. One is only five years older than I. She went to school, graduated, earned this job and, seven months later, nothing.
So I should walk away. In 10 years I’ll probably look back and think “Man, you could have gone to business school and worked at a bank and had bank holidays, but no, you wanted to be Lois Lane.”
I have a friend who says we have to be brave. We need to look for new outlets. There are plenty of outlets out there that people aren’t using. The Northwest London Newspapers must learn to adapt like everyone else. I hope it makes it.
What’s really disappointing about this situation is the content of the news. With three fewer reporters and one fewer editor, the amount of Web updates already are suffering and the size of the paper has decreased. This means less time for investigative stories and less room for stories. Therefore, many stories are missed.
When I first arrived, there were five fulltime reporters and now there are two, and this change happened overnight.
When I first arrived, there were three Web updates a day. There hasn’t been a Web update in days. Though I work at a weekly, the staff still runs daily meetings to discuss coverage and how far along reporters are on their stories. We haven’t had a news meeting in days.
This isn’t the fault of the staff, it’s the fault of the downsizing. It’s scary to think that this regional paper could cease to exist, just as the daily I worked for last summer could cease to exist.
Some argue that a regional newspaper is no longer needed, that national media does it better. Why do you need the Northwest London Newspapers when you have The Guardian and the Daily Telegraph?
Regional papers matter because when you Google Wayne Freckleton, a serial killer who was shot in the head while waiting in line at a barber shop, the only stories that come up about his trial come from the Northwest London Newspapers and the BBC, and the BBC story is only three graphs. I’m sure I sound like a PR representative for the Northwest London Newspapers, but I’m not. I just believe in newspapers.
The scary thing is, three of the four reporters who no longer work here are in their mid to late 20s. One is only five years older than I. She went to school, graduated, earned this job and, seven months later, nothing.
So I should walk away. In 10 years I’ll probably look back and think “Man, you could have gone to business school and worked at a bank and had bank holidays, but no, you wanted to be Lois Lane.”
I have a friend who says we have to be brave. We need to look for new outlets. There are plenty of outlets out there that people aren’t using. The Northwest London Newspapers must learn to adapt like everyone else. I hope it makes it.
Specialize, and follow your passion
By CJ LotzJune 30, 2009
That old journalism phrase rings as true over here as the bells of St. Paul’s. The speakers and editors at the media outlets we’ve visited in London are giving the same advice: get smart on something.
Monday, Salim Amin of A24 Media spoke with our class. A24 media is the culmination of his lifelong passion for Africa. It’s a news agency that tells the stories of Africa by Africans, for Africans and non-Africans in the African perspective. One of its goals is to promote the work of African journalists, storytellers and broadcasters. The agency hopes to broadcast the shows as well as sell them around the world, while allowing the journalists to retain rights to their work.
Amin’s passion is Africa, and he’s used that motivation as well as the Web and new media to tell powerful, often unheard tales of a vibrant continent.
David Schlesinger, editor-in-chief of Reuters, also was firm about the idea of specialization. Know about something. It’s not enough to write well and read newspapers. All your peers do that. Become the master of a subject.
He’s about as perfect an example as you could imagine. Schlesinger studied Chinese and China’s politics, used his master’s thesis as his application clip and became director of Reuter’s China coverage. His specialization just so happened to be one of the decade’s most interesting places for stories and reports.
But your area of focus doesn’t need to be as broad and hard-hitting as covering China. Choose a country, art, subject or topic that you care about and know it, read about it, and become your own expert.
For me, it’s everything Haitian. I’m learning Haitian Creole, traveling to Haiti this summer, and reading everything I can about the people, language and history of one of the world’s most misunderstood countries.
Think about how interesting it is to talk with someone who cares about something you know nothing about. Dance, golf, politics in Russia. It’s not only great for dinner parties, but an interesting advantage in an interview and as a resume item.
The notion of “Renaissance man” is outdated. Wield a variety of skills, but pursue passions too.
We also heard from James Brabazon, who pursued the story of civil war in Liberia even when no one would listen. He became so connected to the story that he risked his life gathering footage even when he didn’t know where or if it would be shown.
There’s this rumor of “objective journalism” that floats around. But the journalists I met in London proved something to me: passion can lead to the best stories. Learn the tools. Know various ways of storytelling: through pictures, video and words, but first educate yourself. Know background information and understand the nuances of topics.
Impassioned reporting that is well-sourced can bring change, but that’s all up to the reader.
“We do the most good by getting the stories out,” Amin told our class. “Our job is not to change policy but to give people information. What they do with that is up to them.”
Amin’s passion is Africa, and he’s used that motivation as well as the Web and new media to tell powerful, often unheard tales of a vibrant continent.
David Schlesinger, editor-in-chief of Reuters, also was firm about the idea of specialization. Know about something. It’s not enough to write well and read newspapers. All your peers do that. Become the master of a subject.
He’s about as perfect an example as you could imagine. Schlesinger studied Chinese and China’s politics, used his master’s thesis as his application clip and became director of Reuter’s China coverage. His specialization just so happened to be one of the decade’s most interesting places for stories and reports.
But your area of focus doesn’t need to be as broad and hard-hitting as covering China. Choose a country, art, subject or topic that you care about and know it, read about it, and become your own expert.
For me, it’s everything Haitian. I’m learning Haitian Creole, traveling to Haiti this summer, and reading everything I can about the people, language and history of one of the world’s most misunderstood countries.
Think about how interesting it is to talk with someone who cares about something you know nothing about. Dance, golf, politics in Russia. It’s not only great for dinner parties, but an interesting advantage in an interview and as a resume item.
The notion of “Renaissance man” is outdated. Wield a variety of skills, but pursue passions too.
We also heard from James Brabazon, who pursued the story of civil war in Liberia even when no one would listen. He became so connected to the story that he risked his life gathering footage even when he didn’t know where or if it would be shown.
There’s this rumor of “objective journalism” that floats around. But the journalists I met in London proved something to me: passion can lead to the best stories. Learn the tools. Know various ways of storytelling: through pictures, video and words, but first educate yourself. Know background information and understand the nuances of topics.
Impassioned reporting that is well-sourced can bring change, but that’s all up to the reader.
“We do the most good by getting the stories out,” Amin told our class. “Our job is not to change policy but to give people information. What they do with that is up to them.”
What happened to Act II?
By Courtney MillerJune 25, 2009
Act I. Two boys, young in age, are seen wrestling on the floor. With the slight difference in height, one may mistake them as brothers. The shorter one breaks out into laughter. They are playing cowboys and Indians, and they are childhood friends.
The taller boy moves away with his parents. They travel far, and the two boys do not see each other for many years. After they have grown tall, they reunite. They look even more alike than before, but they see things differently.
Their views are founded on the same fundamental belief, but while one sees things from the left side, the other sees things from the right. They argue. The argument turns into violence, and soon there is bloodshed and a full-blown war involving both of their families. There is suffering and death and thousands of people are forced from their land and left with nothing but what they could carry.
Curtain.
The director and technicians leave, and the actors are in darkness.
This is the basis of most stories we read and news we watch. It is one of heightened emotion, pain, hate and love. It is incomplete. The story ends abruptly without any explanation of what happened to either family. How did they overcome the tragedy? Did they rebuild their communities and make peace? The audience is left with these questions unanswered and is forced to use their imagination.
What happened to Act II?
Without a truthful depiction of post-conflict period, the audience is left with a distorted view of reality. They misconstrue the issues, which only causes further problems in the future.
I blame the media. We are responsible for informing the public, so why do we only focus on chaos? Because before it’s over, we’ve moved on to the next war, disaster or tragedy. It’s a sort of get in, get out method. The story of the aftermath and how people were affected goes untold unless their situation worsens and leads to more destruction. Some get trapped in a cycle of ruin, which is why their countries stay in the news.
I have read numerous accounts of people from developing regions angered by the coverage their countries get in the media, which fail to show the efforts people make to rebuild their communities and improve their living conditions. By portraying theses countries only in a negative light, the media is playing a role in preventing these regions from receiving proper aid. No one wants to invest in the development of a region that is always at war or is unstable.
I came to London knowing I wanted to report on overlooked international issues, but I didn’t know to what extent. Did I want to cover crisis news, or did I want to focus on humanitarian aid? After two months of researching different conflicts going unreported in every corner of the world, I have come to realize one thing. I do want to travel to the forgotten parts of the world, but I don’t want to be caught in the crossfire.
I want to stand beside it. I want to show the damage it does to the people and the environment it destroys. Specifically, I want to focus on the women who are often neglected by the media during these times, but typically the ones who keep the families together and rebuild the communities. Women play vital roles in the development and post-conflict reconciliation. Without their influence and help, many things would go unchanged.
Call me a feminist, but I believe this to be the truth. If I want to tell the real untold stories, then I probably shouldn’t go to the men during times of crisis. They are sourced more than 80 percent of the time.
If I want a genuine outlook on the ravages of war, the aftermath of conflicts, or the rehabilitation of communities, who better to speak to than those who work behind the scenes? Who better to speak to than the lead actors during the neglected half of most stories we read in the papers or watch on the news? I’m bringing back Act II.
This is the basis of most stories we read and news we watch. It is one of heightened emotion, pain, hate and love. It is incomplete. The story ends abruptly without any explanation of what happened to either family. How did they overcome the tragedy? Did they rebuild their communities and make peace? The audience is left with these questions unanswered and is forced to use their imagination.
What happened to Act II?
Without a truthful depiction of post-conflict period, the audience is left with a distorted view of reality. They misconstrue the issues, which only causes further problems in the future.
I blame the media. We are responsible for informing the public, so why do we only focus on chaos? Because before it’s over, we’ve moved on to the next war, disaster or tragedy. It’s a sort of get in, get out method. The story of the aftermath and how people were affected goes untold unless their situation worsens and leads to more destruction. Some get trapped in a cycle of ruin, which is why their countries stay in the news.
I have read numerous accounts of people from developing regions angered by the coverage their countries get in the media, which fail to show the efforts people make to rebuild their communities and improve their living conditions. By portraying theses countries only in a negative light, the media is playing a role in preventing these regions from receiving proper aid. No one wants to invest in the development of a region that is always at war or is unstable.
I came to London knowing I wanted to report on overlooked international issues, but I didn’t know to what extent. Did I want to cover crisis news, or did I want to focus on humanitarian aid? After two months of researching different conflicts going unreported in every corner of the world, I have come to realize one thing. I do want to travel to the forgotten parts of the world, but I don’t want to be caught in the crossfire.
I want to stand beside it. I want to show the damage it does to the people and the environment it destroys. Specifically, I want to focus on the women who are often neglected by the media during these times, but typically the ones who keep the families together and rebuild the communities. Women play vital roles in the development and post-conflict reconciliation. Without their influence and help, many things would go unchanged.
Call me a feminist, but I believe this to be the truth. If I want to tell the real untold stories, then I probably shouldn’t go to the men during times of crisis. They are sourced more than 80 percent of the time.
If I want a genuine outlook on the ravages of war, the aftermath of conflicts, or the rehabilitation of communities, who better to speak to than those who work behind the scenes? Who better to speak to than the lead actors during the neglected half of most stories we read in the papers or watch on the news? I’m bringing back Act II.
Hooked on the Guardian
By Zach SchalkJune 24, 2009
There are many perks that come with being a student at Indiana University. The wonderfully sprawling campus, the abundance of culture and entertainment and the (sometimes) great basketball all immediately come to mind.
 |
| Courtesy photo |
| Zach Schalk at his internship in London. Hooked on newspapers, he’s become a fan of the Guardian. |
While I have continued to follow the Times online since arriving in London, it just isn’t the same. In Bloomington, I often lose evenings flipping through the day old news, letting my fingers turn black with ink. The visceral feel of reading a newspaper is very much a part of my daily routine. How was I to fill that void while in London?
At first, I tried to go the cheap route. When entering and exiting tube stations, you are bombarded with street vendors pushing their cheap tabloids into your hand: the City A.M., the Metro, the London Lite. All are free and offer some sort of distraction during my commute, so I gave them a try. Of course, I was still unsatisfied.
We’ve learned much about the newspapers in England since coming to London. Each has a distinct voice and audience. While most U.S. papers keep their agenda and political inclinations to the opinion page, papers in the U.K. wear them proudly throughout each issue.
Some are highbrow and informative while others pander openly to the public’s demand for sports and sex. In this environment of openly opinionated newspapers, I knew exactly what to look for. To fill the empty spot left by the New York Times, I turned to the Guardian.
A slick looking paper, the Guardian makes great use of photography as well as classic reporting and writing. Stylistically, it’s somewhere between the subdued New York Times and the colorful USA Today, and it’s obvious emphasis on environmental issues and liberal stances on politics are right up my alley.
Since I’m a student budgeting myself in not-so-budget-friendly London, I soon realized that I wasn’t going to be buying a new copy of the Guardian every day. Perhaps I’ve been spoiled by the availability of free papers available in Bloomington. However, my frugality did come with a silver lining. In the end it only caused me to widen my Internet newsgathering habits to include the newspaper’s award winning Web site.
By using an exceptional blend of new and old media, the Guardian has become a beacon of journalism not just in the U.K. but also around the world. While I may never be able to devour a hard copy of the newspaper daily as I do the New York Times, the Guardian’s Web site can surely expect more hits from across the Atlantic in the future.
Beware, but mostly be aware
By Jessica HaneyJune 23, 2009
If nothing else, this trip has certainly taught me to be more aware of my surroundings.
I’m constantly paying attention to what Brits say, for one. You may think we all speak English, but trust me, there’s a language barrier. This became especially apparent when I was writing a feature for my magazine. I used the word “quaint” to describe a cute, quiet part of town and my editor, Hermione, was grossly offended.
“EEEEEK!” read my edited copy. Uh oh. I looked further down the page. “EEEEEK!” it said a second time. Why, of all words, did I have to use “quaint” twice?
When I approached her about it, she had a troubled look on her face. “We are not quaint,” she said. London is a lively city, she tried to explain to me. “Quaint” is belittling.
I then suggested my error in thinking, but quickly realized that my understanding of “quaint” does not align with Hermione’s.
London is not quaint. And now I’m more aware of which language I choose.
Here’s another instance. This past weekend, I travelled to Amsterdam with some friends for a relaxing holiday. Yet I was anything but relaxed when it came to crossing streets.
First of all, Amsterdam is not simply made up of two-way roads. All sorts of transportation entities travel the streets, hardly any of which follow a straight line. On top of that, each has its separate signal to “go.” It wasn’t the traffic congestion I couldn’t handle. It was the basic rules of the road.
Amid the cars, bikes, buses and trams taking turns at intersections to go on their isolated, merry ways, I couldn’t figure out when I was supposed to walk. So I made like a sheep (http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sleep/sheep/reaction_version5.swf) and followed the herd—as fast as I could.
It took a few frightening, life-flashing instances, but I eventually got the hang of it. Look left, look right, look forward, up, down, behind you, etc. It’s that awareness, I tell you.
All this still doesn’t measure up to my favorite new awareness of all: international media. Call me sheltered, but before this trip I was a Herald-Times/feministing.com/NPR/Indiana Daily Student/NewYorkTimes consumer of news. Made in America.
London is a place with an incredibly robust media culture that I’m glad I’ve tapped into. I was surprised to find out that it even has a club exclusively for journalists (http://frontlineclub.com/). Housed in a more central part of the world, London seems to have a firmer grip on international events and a large variety of content.
One specific news agency that stands out in my mind is Al Jazeera (http://english.aljazeera.net/). This interesting, critical facet of storytelling is virtually absent in the U.S., yet it provides an Arabic media presence to diversify the typical American diet. It has certainly made me more aware of the world.
Our class with professor John Owen, media guru, has been enormously helpful in broadening my perspective. He’s introduced me to many new possibilities, from Demotix (http://www.demotix.com/) to Haaretz (http://www.haaretz.com/) to PressTV (http://www.presstv.ir/) to the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/), I’ve discovered ways to escape American-saturated news on multiple platforms.
However, just because it’s made somewhere else doesn’t mean it’s devoid of American influence. America is everywhere. One international perspective I’ve become aware of is this obsession with Obama. The Guardian, a well-respected newspaper in London, is particularly fond of him, with columnists proclaiming that his speech in Cairo was “the speech no other president could make.” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/04/barack-obama-speech-islam-west) And just the other day, Hermione asked, “How do we apply to get Barack Obama to be our president?”
Well, I want Barack Obama to be my President. I also want to consume media made in my country, although not exclusively. Thanks to this trip, this class and basic perception, I’ve become aware of not only what immediately surrounds me, but also aware of the bigger issues that shape this world.
And I think both Hermione and I would agree that that is definitely not quaint.
When I approached her about it, she had a troubled look on her face. “We are not quaint,” she said. London is a lively city, she tried to explain to me. “Quaint” is belittling.
I then suggested my error in thinking, but quickly realized that my understanding of “quaint” does not align with Hermione’s.
London is not quaint. And now I’m more aware of which language I choose.
Here’s another instance. This past weekend, I travelled to Amsterdam with some friends for a relaxing holiday. Yet I was anything but relaxed when it came to crossing streets.
First of all, Amsterdam is not simply made up of two-way roads. All sorts of transportation entities travel the streets, hardly any of which follow a straight line. On top of that, each has its separate signal to “go.” It wasn’t the traffic congestion I couldn’t handle. It was the basic rules of the road.
Amid the cars, bikes, buses and trams taking turns at intersections to go on their isolated, merry ways, I couldn’t figure out when I was supposed to walk. So I made like a sheep (http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/sleep/sheep/reaction_version5.swf) and followed the herd—as fast as I could.
It took a few frightening, life-flashing instances, but I eventually got the hang of it. Look left, look right, look forward, up, down, behind you, etc. It’s that awareness, I tell you.
All this still doesn’t measure up to my favorite new awareness of all: international media. Call me sheltered, but before this trip I was a Herald-Times/feministing.com/NPR/Indiana Daily Student/NewYorkTimes consumer of news. Made in America.
London is a place with an incredibly robust media culture that I’m glad I’ve tapped into. I was surprised to find out that it even has a club exclusively for journalists (http://frontlineclub.com/). Housed in a more central part of the world, London seems to have a firmer grip on international events and a large variety of content.
One specific news agency that stands out in my mind is Al Jazeera (http://english.aljazeera.net/). This interesting, critical facet of storytelling is virtually absent in the U.S., yet it provides an Arabic media presence to diversify the typical American diet. It has certainly made me more aware of the world.
Our class with professor John Owen, media guru, has been enormously helpful in broadening my perspective. He’s introduced me to many new possibilities, from Demotix (http://www.demotix.com/) to Haaretz (http://www.haaretz.com/) to PressTV (http://www.presstv.ir/) to the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/), I’ve discovered ways to escape American-saturated news on multiple platforms.
However, just because it’s made somewhere else doesn’t mean it’s devoid of American influence. America is everywhere. One international perspective I’ve become aware of is this obsession with Obama. The Guardian, a well-respected newspaper in London, is particularly fond of him, with columnists proclaiming that his speech in Cairo was “the speech no other president could make.” (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/04/barack-obama-speech-islam-west) And just the other day, Hermione asked, “How do we apply to get Barack Obama to be our president?”
Well, I want Barack Obama to be my President. I also want to consume media made in my country, although not exclusively. Thanks to this trip, this class and basic perception, I’ve become aware of not only what immediately surrounds me, but also aware of the bigger issues that shape this world.
And I think both Hermione and I would agree that that is definitely not quaint.
Ads on the front page? Effective!
By Alex FarrisJune 23, 2009
We got to London at an exciting time for British media. The Guardian and The Independent newspapers were able to plant reporters in Tehran even while the Iranian government started to squelch international journalists, the BBC’s license fee might get divvied up between one or two other networks if the Digital Britain report gets implemented, and The Daily Telegraph began its exposé into MP expenses in the first week of our time here.
But what shocks me the most about British media are the free papers and what they do with their front pages.
 |
| Courtesy photo |
| Alex Farris spends a lot of time perusing British newspapers. He at first was shocked by front page ads, but found they did spur him to go shopping. |
The really persistent ones flip the paper a few times frying-pan style, creating the same annoying effect of a flashing marquee to tell your eyes, “Pay attention to me!” But I resist, partly because I want “quality” news, partly because I get all the big-name papers at work.
I’ve picked up a few free papers, though, and I’ve seen something that would make those who complained about ads on The New York Times’ front page cringe: One morning, the free Metro paper had a full-page front page advertisement. A full page! On the front page! It was for Waitrose grocery store, and it threw me for 10 loops. Sure, the top corner said, “Inside: Your Usual Metro,” but my first reaction was fear that newspaper editors had listened to an advertising executive’s plea to “tear down this wall.”
Yes, it was in a free newspaper that has little other means of revenue, but what does that say about the value of news? Should informing the masses about the city’s events come second to informing the masses about the best place to buy milk? Could this have happened at a national British paper like The Times? In a faltering economy and a changing media environment, should the wall I referenced earlier still exist, and if so, where?
Unfortunately, I didn’t ask myself those intriguing questions. The advert caught me at a weak moment (I was nearly out of food in the fridge), so instead (and this scared me more than anything else) I asked myself, “Where’s the nearest Waitrose? It’s on the front page, so it has to be good!”
Why can’t we be friends?
By Kelsey McArdleJune 22, 2009
It’s not a huge secret in the journalism world that there are two separate forces that, like two people in an unstable relationship, can’t live with each other yet can’t live without each other.
Journalism and public relations are like best friends that talk smack behind the other one’s back.
 |
| Courtesy photo |
| Kelsey McArdle (far right) mugs with coworkers at Bang On, a public relations firm that represents those in the music industry. McArdle wonders why journalists and PR people can’t get along. |
Let’s break it down: Journalists are almost subliminally (and sometimes blatantly) taught to watch public relations with a skeptical eye and “beware” of PR’s no-so-subtle lack of objectivity in promoting clients or stories. On the other side of the coin, publicists are warned of manipulative journalists who will do or say nearly anything for a lead on a story — they aren’t the only ones who will submit to schmoozing.
As someone who has been on the track to music journalism since age 13 and who now is interning at a music PR company, I feel I can stand back as the middle man and say, “Well, you both make a good point. Let’s work it out.”
I have been the journalist depending on a press release for information, yet trying to find the facts within the praise. I have also been the publicist, dealing with journalists begging for press passes and then falling through on promises of stories or reviews. It’s just oh-so-frustrating no matter how you slice it.
But must it be like this? First, let’s acknowledge that no matter how much they may loathe each other, they need each other to fuel the media flames. You can’t have one without the other. So why can’t we all settle down, accept our places in this wide media world and do what we can to help each other out and not screw each other over?
Well, maybe I’m just too optimistic. Writers, no matter if they call themselves journalists or publicists, love their drama. It’d probably just be too boring without the smack-talking anyway.
In defense of The Sun
By Sam LeffersJune 18, 2009
Much hoopla has been made among our London group about the popularity of tabloid newspaper, The Sun.
“They’re ridiculous!”
“They don’t report the news!”
“The design is hideous!”
“They feature a topless girl on page three every day!”
These accusations are, more or less, true (although I wouldn’t know the fourth one – I swear). But here’s another truth: The Sun is by far the most popular publication in the U.K., boasting a daily readership of almost 8 million people.
The Sun wields the kind of power most papers dream of. It’s been known to swing elections, and many believe The Sun’s support was the reason prime minister Tony Blair won a landslide victory in 1997.
Posing for the page three photo spread is even seen as an honor, and fathers are proud to have their daughters appear topless for 8 million people. If that doesn’t tell you the kind of popularity this paper enjoys in the U.K., nothing will.
To most serious journalists, this is ludicrous. Why should a silly tabloid be more popular and powerful than a respectable news outlet like The Guardian?
Granted, The Sun isn’t exactly like American tabloids – it reports the news, be it in a scarce and underdeveloped fashion. You’ll find the day’s big news stories, but page one is more likely to deal with a celebrity’s romance scandal than the British MP expenses scandal.
Still, I don’t hate The Sun. In fact, I think it’s fascinating. Imagine an ultimate manifestation of public will – a paper that not only panders to the public, but completely bases its content on sales.
And can you blame them? Journalistic responsibility aside, there is obviously a market for this kind of material. That market is the British working class, and The Sun is essentially a case study in how to reach them.
Because in the end, life for this demographic is hard. Corporate execs may be able to kick back in a cafe with a copy of The Financial Times, but after working 10 hours of road construction (and trust me, there’s plenty of it in London), maybe some people just want to have a drink and a laugh at ridiculous headlines and sensationalist stories.
The Sun is the people’s paper, and they know people. Until the working U.K. starts hankering for hard news instead of harsh gossip, The Sun will dominate the British print medium.
And the topless girls don’t hurt, either.
The Sun wields the kind of power most papers dream of. It’s been known to swing elections, and many believe The Sun’s support was the reason prime minister Tony Blair won a landslide victory in 1997.
Posing for the page three photo spread is even seen as an honor, and fathers are proud to have their daughters appear topless for 8 million people. If that doesn’t tell you the kind of popularity this paper enjoys in the U.K., nothing will.
To most serious journalists, this is ludicrous. Why should a silly tabloid be more popular and powerful than a respectable news outlet like The Guardian?
Granted, The Sun isn’t exactly like American tabloids – it reports the news, be it in a scarce and underdeveloped fashion. You’ll find the day’s big news stories, but page one is more likely to deal with a celebrity’s romance scandal than the British MP expenses scandal.
Still, I don’t hate The Sun. In fact, I think it’s fascinating. Imagine an ultimate manifestation of public will – a paper that not only panders to the public, but completely bases its content on sales.
And can you blame them? Journalistic responsibility aside, there is obviously a market for this kind of material. That market is the British working class, and The Sun is essentially a case study in how to reach them.
Because in the end, life for this demographic is hard. Corporate execs may be able to kick back in a cafe with a copy of The Financial Times, but after working 10 hours of road construction (and trust me, there’s plenty of it in London), maybe some people just want to have a drink and a laugh at ridiculous headlines and sensationalist stories.
The Sun is the people’s paper, and they know people. Until the working U.K. starts hankering for hard news instead of harsh gossip, The Sun will dominate the British print medium.
And the topless girls don’t hurt, either.
Comparing Brit and U.S. reporting
By Sarah Brubeck
June 18, 2009
Reporting in the states is simple. It’s familiar and comfortable, and reporters always strive to be ethical, or at least that’s what we’re supposed to accomplish.
But in London, the rules aren’t as hard and fast. Brits pose photographs, pick political sides in their coverage and use PR representatives as common sources, all in the name of journalism.
 |
| Courtesy photo |
| Sarah Brubeck experiences navigating the streets without sight during a demonstration she covered for her internship job. Caroline Weston (right) of the Guide Dog group is with her. Brubeck is finding differences in how British media covers events. |
My first assignment involved a protest with the Guide Dog Association in London. While reporting on the protest, I was surprised to see how posed the photographs were. Action shots were taken, but the first thing the protesters did was stand for several group shots from several different news organizations, definitely not something we do in the states.
I’ve also discovered that PR representatives are more aggressive. Whenever I’ve reported in the past, PR representatives send out a press release and help with contacts, but in London, they are more involved. For instance, before any protesters arrived on the scene, I was shaking hands with a councilman’s PR representative and scheduling an interview with the man of power.
Also, I covered a story about the setting of a Guinness world record and the representatives wanted my cell phone number, which is something I’ve never been asked for by a representative in the past. Once I arrived to the scene, the representatives found me within a matter of minutes as if they were birds waiting for their prey and immediately handed me back and forth to different people to interview. I had to politely tell the representatives that I wanted to do some reporting on my own so I could simply talk to random participants.
At that event, participants were trying to break a record for the most retail shirts folded at the same time. Organizers waited for a drum roll before announcing the results and when the announcement was finally made, very few people cheered. The audience was then encouraged to cheer so a photographer could get a photograph.
As I was doing my interviews, I discovered the record was being set for the first time and the PR representatives knew they were setting a record, not breaking one. There was no question whether or not they would set the record, but they publicized it like it was a huge ordeal, though the results were known before it even started.
The writing style is different, too. For my internship at a weekly regional paper, the stories are quick and to the point. The writers don’t waste time writing catchy leads. They get the news to you and move you on to the next story.
It’s refreshing, though, to see so many news outlets in one city. At the same time, the newspapers in London are more like broadcast in the states. They have a political viewpoint and all their readers are aware of it. They openly show their biases with no shame and many of the designs are in a tabloid format.
Though I’m adapting to the differences, as an American journalist, I still yearn for a clean design with less biased reporting (though I’m giving American journalists more credit than they sometimes deserve).
Visiting Al Jazeera
By Caitlin JohnstonJune 18, 2009
Monday, May 25, was a bank holiday, so our class took a field trip to visit Al Jazeera English. For those who don’t know about Al Jazeera, here is a basic synopsis from Wikipedia (because what’s more reliable?):
"Al Jazeera English is a 24-hour English-language news and current affairs TV channel headquartered in Doha, Qatar. It is one of the three largest English-language news channels worldwide, and is the sister channel of the Arab-language Al Jazeera."
 |
| Courtesy photo |
| Caitlin Johnston found the visit to Al Jazeera enlightening. She’s also enjoying sightseeing while in London. |
Rebecca Lipkin, the executive producer of programming for AJE, is not unaware of this stereotype. In fact, she had to practically twist our arms to get us to spit out the words nearly all of us were thinking.
Now, unlike many in the group, I was exposed to the network about four years ago when a high school classmate of mine watched the channel. After exploring it myself, I realized it wasn’t some big, anti-American, Jew-hating broadcast channel out to destroy the Western world. Instead, it does some really great reporting on world events. I think my fellow classmates saw this, too, after talking with Lipkin. Even the idea that Al Jazeera is anti-Semitic was suspended upon learning that Lipkin herself is Jewish.
Lipkin, who came to AJE after working at ABC for 20 years, discussed the ability of the network to cover events and go to places that a lot of other networks cannot. Al Jazeera maintains reporters and offices in many countries now abandoned by other networks due to the worldwide economic downturn. "We have the ability to go places other companies don’t," Lipkin said. And based on the economic climate, she is correct.
As a group, we discussed the evolution of journalism and storytelling. No longer do we have a set equation of "Side A says this; Side B says this." Fair reporting does not have to be a bland recording of each side’s stance. Sometimes we get too caught up in being fair and balanced, and thus distort a story. For example, when reporting on the holocaust, would you give equal time to people who believe the holocaust never happened? This is an extreme, but a good example of how storytelling has evolved.
After meeting with Lipkin and an associate of hers for a couple of hours, we were free for the day. We walked down to the infamous Harrod’s and explored the luxury department store. With light fixtures that might be more expensive than all of the things I brought with me to London, it is certainly an overwhelming store. After gazing adoringly at the Gucci, Dior and Armani collections, we decided our stomachs could not last any longer and headed back home for lunch.
Now, I decided to survive mostly on traveller’s checks while abroad because of the annoying fees my bank tacks on to debit card uses. However, this means I can only cash them when the post office is open. In the U.S., this means every day but Sunday. I learned, unfortunately, this includes Saturday as well in the U.K. OK, two days, I can deal with that. But the bank holiday, of which I was so quickly becoming a fan, got on my bad side when I realized, banks, fittingly, are closed as well.
I proceeded to shop as economically as I could with my remaining three pounds and bought a loaf of bread, soup, egg fried rice and a banana. Nothing like a cheap homemade dinner and a semi-final episode of Britain’s Got Talent. I could get used to these holidays.
Counting my journalistic blessings
By Katie FayJune 10, 2009
Before we arrived to London, we had a vague idea of what our class in British media would be like. There would be four hours of class on Mondays, followed by some scheduled media visits on Friday afternoons.
I was ecstatic when I found out we would be visiting Reuters and the BBC, but I didn’t know as much about Al-Jezeera or The Guardian newspaper.
At Reuters, I expected some company page to give us a tour and answer our questions. I never in a million years expected David Schlesinger, the worldwide editor-in-chief, to be our guide.
At Al-Jezeera, we had an in-depth discussion with executive producer Rebecca Lipkin about the future of the network and its break into the American market.
At the BBC, we saw the main news hosts broadcast the beginning of their show and participated in the same tutorials given to BBC journalists by the BBC College of Journalism.
At The Guardian, we met editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger, sat in on an editorial meeting and spent an entire hour with foreign editor Harriet Sherwood.
I soaked up everything I could at those visits, and while I knew it was cool to be going to those places and meeting with those people, I think I took for granted at first just how lucky we were to be there at all.
At a recent company event for my internship, I talked more with my co-workers about my life in London (more so than every day around our computers). In talking about our class, I mentioned in passing the places we’d been and the people we’d met.
Never before had I heard such loud British screams. The people in my office were positively squealing and demanded to know how I got to meet the editor of The Guardian and chat with people at Al-Jezeera.
After the initial shock wore off, they quickly turned to devising ways to disguise themselves as American students so that they could come on our media visits with us.
“I want some ‘kaw-fee,’” one replied. “See? That’s American! Think they’ll believe it?”
In truth, they seemed almost devastated when Sam (another IU intern) and I told them it probably wouldn’t pass.
“No, no, really! I’ll practice! I want to go to a Guardian editorial meeting!”
Without a doubt, I went home that night to count my journalist blessings and with a new appreciation for media visits. I wonder where we’ll end up this Friday.
At Reuters, I expected some company page to give us a tour and answer our questions. I never in a million years expected David Schlesinger, the worldwide editor-in-chief, to be our guide.
At Al-Jezeera, we had an in-depth discussion with executive producer Rebecca Lipkin about the future of the network and its break into the American market.
At the BBC, we saw the main news hosts broadcast the beginning of their show and participated in the same tutorials given to BBC journalists by the BBC College of Journalism.
At The Guardian, we met editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger, sat in on an editorial meeting and spent an entire hour with foreign editor Harriet Sherwood.
I soaked up everything I could at those visits, and while I knew it was cool to be going to those places and meeting with those people, I think I took for granted at first just how lucky we were to be there at all.
At a recent company event for my internship, I talked more with my co-workers about my life in London (more so than every day around our computers). In talking about our class, I mentioned in passing the places we’d been and the people we’d met.
Never before had I heard such loud British screams. The people in my office were positively squealing and demanded to know how I got to meet the editor of The Guardian and chat with people at Al-Jezeera.
After the initial shock wore off, they quickly turned to devising ways to disguise themselves as American students so that they could come on our media visits with us.
“I want some ‘kaw-fee,’” one replied. “See? That’s American! Think they’ll believe it?”
In truth, they seemed almost devastated when Sam (another IU intern) and I told them it probably wouldn’t pass.
“No, no, really! I’ll practice! I want to go to a Guardian editorial meeting!”
Without a doubt, I went home that night to count my journalist blessings and with a new appreciation for media visits. I wonder where we’ll end up this Friday.