Periscope

 

perriperiscope is the leading live Streaming App in today’s market! It is very useful for journalist at any level. You don’t need a lighting crew sound guy or even know how to use a fancy camera (tho you should know the basics) If anything is going on all you have to do is point and shoot and you are your own news anchor! Well of course with any social media platform you will want followers in order to get those you need to make sure you are authentic! People can see right through the fake person that you are trying to be especially since this is LIVE! Make sure you are not constantly apologizing for thing it make you look unprofessional and like you dont ever know what you are talking about!

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/periscope/id972909677?mt=8

 

https://www.periscope.tv/

 

Let’s Debate

 

 

gpb

The Republican GOP National debate aired November 10th 2015 on Fox business network moderated by Neil Cavuti, Maria Bartiromo, and Gerard Baker who is the editor- in-chief of Wall Street Journal. All participating candidates as followed, Gov. Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and Gov. Bobby Jindal, Donald J. Trump, Ben Carson, Senator Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Senator Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Gov. John R. Kasich and Senator Rand Paul. Although this aired on fox it was viewable on cellphones using the Fox Business website via livestreaming. This was extremely important because with new technological advances like Chromecast and Amazon Fire paired with apps like Netflix and Hulu people don’t even need cable to watch some of their favorite shows. Having the ability to live steam allowed me and millions to keep up on politics without a cable subscription or bring forced to read bias articles on what happened. The moderates asked some pretty hard hitting questions to each of the candidates some deriving form twitter and Facebook. Like most of our debates there was and overlap in taking, arguing and if Donald Trump is a part of it an extreme amount of strange faces and eye-rolling. This debate focused mainly on jobs, taxes and the economy as well as international policy. Now I will say that I 100% believe that political debate is extremely important for Americans to learn where each candidate stands on policy’s that effect America while grasping a sense of who will do the best at holding office for the next four years but my biggest critique would have to deal with time management! I feel like there need to be a system or bigger penalty for going over the allotted time. Most of the debate was spent with candidates auguring and yelling about their policy, how it will change America for their better and each of them wanting to get the last word. Knowing and being apart of debates you it is just common courtesy that you make your solid point then allow your opponent to make theirs while also being respectful of the time. These candidates had a blatant disregard for the few minutes allotted to them. Grated this republican debate was much more substantial than the previous three that seemed bias toward certain candidates but work still needs to be done when dealing with time management. With that being said people still enjoyed this debate more with ratings of about 14 million according to Nielsen ratings data these ratings were the highest ever seen in the history of the business news network yet it trailed behind the second debate with 23 million viewers and the first debate with 24 million viewers. After each debate there is usually a poll that asked viewers who they thought won we had Donald Trump in the lead at 42% followed by Marco Rubio with 16 % Rand Paul with 13 % Ben Carson 12 % and John Kasich, Carly Fiorina ,Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz with less that 10% according to US News. That is not my only critique about the debate, I was wondering why the Wall Street Journal was allowed to sponsor such debates or more broadly why is any news organization allowed to sponsor debates. Being in college has taught me that we journalist should not have a bias just seek truth and report it having major news organizations like CNN, Fox or Wall Street Journal should only show the programing but not sponsor. Like I said having a debate is wonderful and allows American people to be apart of the political world but I think there should just be more rules dealing with the art of debating for these candidates.

 

https://www.gop.com/

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/

 

 

 

Race and News Media

raceFor centuries racial discrimination has played a huge role in the everyday lives of African Americans they had to fight an constant uphill battle with segregation on the busses hotels restaurants and even simple things like a drinking fountain it took many years for the government to realize that this kind of treatment to a given race is unconstitutional. Finally they passed rules and regulations to try and bring equality to all (men) but not everything has been solved. It has been 50 years since the civil rights act of 1964 but it seems to me that African Americans are still facing racial discrimination but in a whole new way.
The various main broadcast networks and their affiliates are the most used source for people to get local or national news and entertainment but sadly it is helping to push the racial inequalities and stereotypes for many minorities especially African Americans.
On many shows you flip to on any station (BET included ) you can see an African American male playing one of four roles “A sidekick of a white protagonist to help with the comedic relief, the athlete, the over-sexed ladies’ man, the absentee father or the violent black man as drug-dealing criminal and gangster thug.” This generalization of African Americans does not only apply to men, women play the role of the hard working “IDON’T NEED A MAN”, the one that is struggling with a dead beat dad Angry black woman Baby momma Black Barbie Gold-digger Unhealthy fat black woman or she plays a mistress to a very wealthy man (scandal). Now I won’t lie these shows can be very entertaining but detrimental to the African American society. According to Darron T. Smith “These stereotypical, one-dimensional characters in film negate the broader and deeper experience of black life… Once these representations of blackness become familiar and accepted, they fuel misperceptions and perpetuate misunderstandings among the “races” These negative stereotypes of African American people are often used to justify racial inequities that they face daily. For example “rates of school discipline underachievement in higher education, and higher rates of poverty, homicide, unemployment, and over involvement in the criminal system.” Entertainment television are not the only people ones that cause this negative view of African Americans but local and national news dose as well.
Day in and day out millions of people watch their news and see a local robbery or shooting while the station shows you a picture of a beat down African American man’s mug shot. Once people constantly see a crime attached to a give race they start to make negative judgments about this group of people. In a study where Heinz Endowments examine how Pittsburgh newspapers and local television newscasts cover African American males they found that many of the stations so African Americans in a negative light. Local residents (of all races) got to attend a meeting about the study on the city and many said that they thought the local news was unbalanced and even damaging reporting. Both analyses concluded that a disproportionate amount of Pittsburgh news coverage of African American men and boys focused on crime. The Meyer team reported that crime headed the list of all news topics related to the group. Pittsburgh psychologist Walter Howard states “We just aren’t portrayed well as people who are intelligent or thoughtful or interested in things like the environment or social causes,” “In either medium, however, African American males only rarely were present in stories that involved such topics as education, business, the economy, the environment and the arts,” reported the Pew staff. “Of the nearly 5,000 stories studied in both print and broadcast, less than 4 percent featured an African American male engaged in a subject other than crime or sports.” These results could have been discouraging to the Endowments and its community partners; instead, the findings have fueled efforts to encourage mainstream media to broaden their coverage of black men and boys and to support projects that put media in the hands of African American males, enabling them to tell their own stories and to challenge those told about them. In an article by Joshunda Sanders he states “the real problem is that people are becoming desensitized to one-dimensional portrayals of black youths. Perpetuation of them as dangerous has been embedded in American society not only by words and images projected by journalists but also by a wide variety of other media and entertainment sources, including the Internet, movies and video games.”
This problem not only effect African Americans but it affects all races in a statement by Larry Davis he goes on to say “Overwhelmingly, white Americans learn about African Americans not through personal relationships, but through images shown by media. Unfortunately, blacks too consume these same images,” “People’s perceptions of themselves are shaped by others’ perceptions of them. There is a very strong psychological component that goes along with the images people are shown themselves,” he said. The projection of negative images, which are seen by both whites and blacks, creates a cycle of negativity. “This affects the way whites see blacks, the way blacks believe whites see them and the way blacks see themselves,”. It would seem hard to change the movies but one amazing actor has paved the way for other leading African Americans to not have to play the role of a gangster or thug. Will Smith “he is often seen starring as a protagonist fighting the good fight rather than the criminal to be apprehended” like most African American male roles. “Yet, for most black actors, the parts they are offered leave them with limited options. Conventionally, white screenwriters, who view the world through the prism of a white lens, write about subject matters that reflect their own narrow experiences living and existing in a highly radicalized society. As a result, the predominately white film industry (from producers to screenwriters to directors), in the market of pleasing their predominately white consumer base, lacks diversity in the depth of their characters. Unfortunately, images and words wound and are difficult to erase from the mind.”
Fighting the media seems like a very difficult job to do but it’s not impossible start local. After The Heinz Endowments brought to light the inequality in the way African Americans are portrayed in the media they worked their hardest to change it. “These results could have been discouraging to the Endowments and its community partners; instead, the results have fueled efforts to encourage mainstream media to broaden their coverage of black men and boys and to support projects that put media in the hands of African American males, enabling them to tell their own stories and to challenge those told about them”
One of the most important things any group of people can do is to control the image of themselves,” and no things will not change overnight but I we stay constant about the type of news and media that we want to see so will Hollywood (because the never want to lose money) This may seem like a hard challenge but it is very possible!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/race-in-the-media/

http://www.theroot.com/blogs/journalisms/2014/09/how_media_have_shaped_our_perception_of_race_and_crime.html

 

My own history with news media

Since the start of the paper press news and the way people receive it constantly changes especially with recent years of the world wide web! You can get news from a paper, social media the TV , Radio and many other options and with each generation it seems that their traditional source of news is trying to keep up with this fast changing world.

For example Senora Amos from the baby boomers generation would get the paper and sit down with coffee and read it. While Sheryl Amos form generation X would just flip on ABC to find her favorite news anchor Peter Jennings while many people of generation Y just get alerts when big stories happen sent to their phone from AP or CNN. Most of these news sources shape how we view the world and how certain news topics effect us. Senora received the Tribune and African American news paper because they “covered what other news paperswere scared to”. She remembers the assassination of president John F Kennedy she was 13 I the 7th grade “ We just left homeroom the bell rang and we were told to return back to homeroom for an announcement, the president was shot and they asked us to pray”. “They let school out early and it was the most silent walk home ever we walked in the TV was on and mom was crying, I’ll never forget that day!” She of course received the news of the president being shot by word of mouth but “That TV stayed on and we kept crying”. Sheryl remembered 9/11 very well . At the time she lived in NYC she recalls the event as being “horrible” when originally asked about the subject she teared up a bit. “We could see and smell the smoke” at first we did not know if it was just an accident but it was scary”.

Lara Logan and the BIG MISTAKE

ll

Lara Logan a “big time” journalist promoted to top-dog seemingly too soon by her CBS executives made a huge mistake October 27th 2013. Logan became the Chief Foreign Correspondent in three years and two years later the top Correspondent of 60 Minutes, here is where she threw the journalistic principle of fact-checking out the window and no media critic, journalist or the nation will let her live it down. This made 60 Minutes lose their credibility because “the truth is they made a mistake” apart of Logan’s short apology no one seemed to be at fault neither of them being accountable proved even more as to why this was not a small mistake that should not be brushed under the rug and punished with a short six month leave.

Although CBS tried to scrub all traces of the 60 Minutes Benghazi report even going as far as petitioning Lexis Nexis to remove the transcript of the report off their database, there are still a few sites that have the transcript up. In the interview Logan asked many questions with answers form Morgan Jones that seemed not plausible. Morgan Jones whose real name is Dylan Davies job was to train the unarmed guards who manned the compound’s gates. He was worried that some of the guys were “no good” and need to leave because they would not fight if the compound was attacked he was right the people of the armed Libyan militia fled . Not long after the initial attack “Morgan Jones scaled the 12-foot high wall of the compound that was still overrun with al Qaeda fighters.” He went on to tell Lara about that happened once he was inside.

“Morgan Jones: One guy saw me. He just shouted. I couldn’t believe that he’d seen me ’cause it was so dark. He started walking towards me.

Lara Logan: And as he was coming closer?

Morgan Jones: As I got closer, I just hit him with the butt of the rifle in the face.

Lara Logan: And?

Morgan Jones: Oh, he went down, yeah.

Lara Logan: He dropped?

Morgan Jones: Yeah, like– like a stone.

Lara Logan: With his face smashed in?

Morgan Jones: Yeah.

Lara Logan: And no one saw you do it?

Morgan Jones: No.

Lara Logan: Or heard it?

Morgan Jones: No, there was too much noise.”

This and many other fabricated stories is what mad up the interview and sent the nation on a frenzy thinking the Obama administration  should have been harder on the terrorist threats. This interview alone push forward a narrative that was untrue.

The major failing was from Lara Logan, Producer Max McClellan and CBS for not fact-checking and leaving it all up to one person, Lara. Not to long after the Benghazi report aired did it come into major questioning from Washington Post and New York Times so Al Ortiz, Executive Producer of Standards and Practices did an internal review and found many red flags. Mr. Ortiz findings could have been caught before the report If any background check was done like asking the FBI or using their journalistic sources to fact check the story. It was also discovered that Mr.Davies was promoting his book through this interview, said book was being published by a publishing house that CBS owned. Lara Logan herself when in with a bias which is against journalist code she had said that she felt the US government didn’t take things seriously. Media reacted in various ways many people wanted answers/investigation as to how this information was allowed on air  so a “journalist investigation was done A writer for Media Matters Brock goes on record to say that he was “glad to see CBS take this step” because an investigation indicated that “the network acknowledges that a serious journalistic transgression occurred.” He called on the network to ensure that it was “an objective, thorough review and the results should be made public.” The news of the fabricated story took to social media and CBS knew they could not keep quiet for long.

The one minute and twenty-seven second apology for the Benghazi Report aired in November 2013 Lara Logan told audience member that 60 Minutes had been “mislead and it was a mistake to include him (Dylan Davies) in our report. For that we are very sorry. The most important thing to everyone at 60 minutes is the truth and the truth is we made a mistake” this short apology got quite the back lash form media critics all over feeling as if no one was held accountable in the apology. Newsday TV critic Verne Gay tweeted “60 Minutes” apology not required. Answers to these questions are: Why did this happen? How will it never happen again? (Well?)” Even up to a year after the apology aired Eric Boehlert of Media Matters for America dedicated a whole article about how CBS still will not come clean about the truth surrounding the report. Where he asks “What is CBS hiding about Lara Logan?” Years after this question has still not been answered and after Logan and McMclellan six month leave they were welcomed back to CBS despite many media critics thinking their punishment was way to short.

One of the first SPJ code of ethics that CBS and Lara Logan broke would have to be SEEK TRUTH and report it. There were many red flags when it came to this report but CBS is should have had a fact checker on this to make sure they were reporting the truth as Eric Boehlert said “the biggest institutional failure was not fact-checking the story, which, of course, is the first and most important rule of journalism. CBS didn’t adequately vet its star source and it didn’t dig deep when obvious flaws should have appeared. i.e. the security guard scaled a 12-foot wall outside the Benghazi complex?”  Another code of ethics that they broke was minimize harm, this report hit the Obama administration hard because many believed that he was not tough enough on the terrorist he was scrutinized for “letting this happen” yet most of it was not true. Lastly the code of ethics that was broke would be accountability the one minute and twenty- seven second apology was not enough it seem as if they put most of the blame of Davies instead of owning up to their own mistakes and promising America that I will not happen again.

This report is still often talked about via social media, media critics and media ethics classes. To promote journalist to ALWAYS fact check and be accountable for your work. It teaches journalist that is a story is to good to be true/ sounds fake; it probably is. After all of this Logan still has a job but hopefully will think twice before running any report with an “eye-witness” without checking the facts first.

 

 

http://nymag.com/news/features/lara-logan-cbs-news-2014-5/

 

The New Age Of TV

About 1.05 million people in the U.S. cut their TV subscriptions last year (CNET.com) granted this could be caused by many reasons from unemployment or switching over to a different company but my theory is that many people are seeing how expensive cable can be and how cheap other TV sources like streaming on Netflix and Hulu is easier you can even watch when and where you want. Online streaming allows you to catch up on old seasons and binge watch all day long. Shows like Scandal, Greys Anatomy and How to get away with Murder come on Thursday’s prime time slot but with four million people subscribed to Hulu/Hulu + how do networks keep their completive numbers to keep those advertiser dollars up?

Well the United States and Canada use Nielsen- statistical sampling to obtain their numbers. They get a “”sample audience” and then count how many in that audience view each program. Nielsen then extrapolates from the sample and estimates the number of viewers in the entire population watching the show.” (Nielsen) With online streaming this become hard to measure in 2013 Nielsen was working on finding a way to get clear numbers of how many people are watching shows online but nothing was solid and without solid numbers it’s hard to get advertisement. For some websites like Netflix’s that’s not really a problem because they do not rely on advertisers for money. Recently Nielsen announced plans to institute systems that track SVOD (Subscription Video-on-Demand) “It was also revealed this tracking would exclude mobile devices (most likely due to the fact most phones wouldn’t be picked up by existing Nielsen boxes). According to statements, the ratings organization plans to compile the data for television networks and studios so they can see how their content performs on each service respectively” (Forbes)

Some shows that  don’t have “all” there numbers they use hashtags(#) on social media sites like Twitter, Facebook to combat time shifting eg: #AHS or #LHHATL to have people tweet while watching like a little community you get to watch it with a whole bunch of people that love the show like you. This tactic is used to get people to watch the time the show comes on instead of on Hulu or Netflix or even DVR

Net Neutrality

This topic is discussed over all news and media stations and apart of many political agendas but it’s a thing that many people in this nation do not understand how this will affect them. The definition defined by the Webster is “the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites.” This basically means that for the people that can afford it they will be able to run their websites on a higher/ faster bandwidth. This will make downloads and uploads faster.

With this there are many people that are for net neutrality and people that are against it . The people that are for it feel as if internet service providers should not be allowed to block or slow down certain websites because they can’t afford the (most likely) high price to get fast internet. This is most closely related to cell phone providers like version and AT&T they aren’t allowed to block the people you can call or text for a higher price. Net neutrality promotes a free market where everyone is on the same playing field which is important, most people don’t stay on a non-responsive/ slow website for to long but if you are a small business and can’t afford to get the higher speed internet they can lose tons of clients that way

Many people that feel like net neutrality is not something that is really necessary they feel as if big companies like hulu, Netflix amazon and google  already have an advantage on faster internet. Which is true many of sites of this caliber run dedicated computer servers inside these ISP which is also called peering connections. So people feel as if its already going on why should we all be worrying about it? Another reason people don’t think this is really such a problem is because most of the people surfing the web are going to these top 30 websites, so if they are making the most money and getting the most hits why not give them faster internet?

 

With that being said many people what net neutrality so we can have a great amount of competition like I stated above the most people are only going to about 30 websites so there is not that much competition out there for websites. Self-proclaimed techie Joshua Steimel says that “I agree. Everyone seems to agree that monopolies are bad and competition is good, and just like you, I would like to see more competition. But if monopolies are bad, why should we trust the U.S. government, the largest, most powerful monopoly in the world?”

Recently in early 2015 the FCC voted to uphold net neutrality and keep the internet free and open. Which is good and bad and soon be review by them again to decide what they think is best.