Final Blog and Holiday Media

This week is the last blog of the semester. I hope you've enjoyed this opportunity to share your opinions with your classmates on these various media topics. So here's the last post.

With the holidays approaching, i'd like you to share with the group any media related traditions you have. Does your family all get together to watch something on TV? Is there any particular show you love to watch every Christmas/Thanksgiving? Why is that show/s so important to you. I know i have some favorites dating back to when i was a kid but i wonder if there are any new shows that have come on recently that will one day be a favorite for my children?

Is MSNBC's Policy Correct?

Recently, Keith Olbermann, who has his own show on MSNBC, was suspended indefinitely without pay when it was revealed he contributed more than $7,000 to three different political candidates without MSNBC approval. MSNBC claimed this was an outright violation of its policy which states:
"Anyone working for NBC News who takes part in civic or other outside activities may find that these activities jeopardize his or her standing as an impartial journalist because they may create the appearance of a conflict of interest. Such activities may include participation in or contributions to political campaigns or groups that espouse controversial positions. You should report any such potential conflicts in advance to, and obtain prior approval of, the President of NBC News or his designee."

Although Olbermann is scheduled to return Tuesday, making it a very short suspension, many claim it was unwarranted and violated his civil rights to make campaign contributions to any candidate of his choosing. Olbermann argued that while he did contribute to these campaigns he never once solicited on air for anyone to give to the candidates. Many think MSNBC was holding itself to a higher standard than FOX News who not only has on-air talent who has contributed to campaigns but has itself, as an organization, contributed directly to republican activist groups.

One thing blurring the line is that many claim the talking heads on the night-time shows are commentators and pundits rather than actual journalists and shouldn't be held to higher journalistic standards. Here's a few articles on the subject. Read them and then give me your opinion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/07/keith-olbermann-to-return_n_780141.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/05/maddow-keith-olbermann-su_n_779851.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/05/keith-olbermann-suspension_n_779727.html

Should Teens Be Able To Buy Violent Games

A California law that restricts the sale of violent video games to those under 18 will be challenged in the Supreme Court soon. Read This Article.

What's your opinion. Do you believe in this ban or do you side with those who say this law violates people's rights. Should a 17-year old be banned from buying a violent game? What if the 17-year old bought the game with money he earned himself? Should these games be treated the same as movies or more like pornography?

The Future of the Media

So what will happen to the media in the future. A recent poll found that most people think newspapers will be extinct by 2050. Amazon.com regularly sells more books through their kindle (electronic form) than hardcover books. We've seen chain stores like Sam Goody's go out of business due to most people downloading their music. What do you predict happens next. How will cell phones change? How will radio change? How will television change? What does the future look like to you.

Context/Content/Facts

So I've avoided the debate about the mosque near ground zero because i felt like it was more of a political issue than a media issue. But recently, there have been some incidents which have spotlighted media figures' beliefs about Islam, terrorism, and the mosque.


First, i want you watch this video.

Then i'd like you to watch this one.

Now this one.

And finally, this one.


So what's your take on this. Were Bill O'Reilly's comments taken out of context? Were they factually correct? Was Kilmeade's comments out of context? Factually Correct? Or were all of these comments biased and uninformed? What's your take on this discussion and these comments?

Stranded on an Island

Hello all,
There's an old conversation game called "stranded on an island." Basically, if you knew you were going to be stranded on an island, what would you take with you? So here's my media related question to you this week. Write a short paragraph on each:

1. If you were stranded on an island, what magazine would you like to wash up onshore every week? And why?

2. If you were stranded on an island, what one movie would you like to take with you (in a portable dvd player, of course)? And why?

3. If you were stranded on an island, what one album/song would you like to be loaded on the mp3 player you took with you? And why?

Good Luck

SPOOKY TIME!!!!

Hello all,
It's that time of year again, my favorite time of year actually (well next to christmas).It's Halloween. I loved trick or treating as a kid and get to relive it all over again now with my own kids. And of course, cable tv is great now cause they show all the horror movies (even if they are edited).

That brings me to my question. What is your favorite Horror Movie. Tell me why it is your favorite. And why do you think we go see horror movies. Even if you don't like them, tell me why you think others go see them. And by the way, here's a good scare for you (not for those with a heart condition).

Is there a place for satire in Congress?

Recently, Stephen Colbert was asked to testify before Congress regarding undocumented immigrants working in America. Colbert participated in an event where Americans were asked to come work in a job that was typically done by illegal immigrants. Colbert worked in a field for a day. Since Colbert was one of only a few that participated, he was asked to talk about his experience.

But Colbert, being a comedian, turned the table. He chose to speak in character, as the pompous blowhard commentator he is on his show. He wrote his testimony the night before and handed it over to the committee. Many were upset that he was going to speak "in character." Both democrats and republicans stated it was inappropriate. Some however did not have a problem with it.

So here's my question. Even though Colbert's testimony was, on its face, part of a comedic act, is there value in what he did? Or was it a waste of time? His celebrity certainly brought out the cameras. Many congressional members said there were more cameras there than normal.

For clips of the event, click here.

What's Your Opinion

So, TV Azteca reporter, Ines Sainz, has been in the headlines lately regarding harassment in the NY Jets locker room. I'd like you to read some of the following articles and watch some of the following videos and give me your opinion. One key point in the whole debate is whether Sainz should have expected the football players to make the rude comments they did given the way she dresses when attending practices. Read the following link describing the incident. It includes what Sainz calls a typical outfit she wears to practice.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/12/ines-sainz-azteca-jets_n_713843.html

Some have commented that she should expect such things when she dresses that way. Here are some comments made backing that opinion.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/16/brian-baldinger-ines-sainz_n_719745.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/17/jenn-sterger-ines-sainz_n_719960.html

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2010/09/rush-limbaugh-ines-sainz-bootylicious/1

Yet some argue that regardless of her dress, Sainz does not deserve to be treated without respect in the locker room. For an example, watch the following.

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201009190010

So what is your opinion on all this? Who was to blame for the incident? Should Sainz have to dress more modestly at practices? Or were the football players out of line?

New Survey Results

The Pew Center recently released the results of their study on the people and the press. I'd like you to read the overview, which can be found here. I'd like you to post with two findings that you thought were surprising and what social implications could result from them.

Was Fox Wrong?

So, even though I try not to talk about Fox News all the time, I pick on them often. There's a host of reasons but probably the biggest one is that they are a ratings giant. They, head and shoulders, beat other news channels in the ratings. Therefore, they should be seen as the "flagship" for broadcast journalism. They set the bar.

Recently you may have heard about Fox's parent company donating $1 million to the republican governor's association. If not, you can read a quick bit about it here. I read the story last week but decided not to use it for the blog.

Then, another story surfaced showing that the Democratic Governor's Association was going to sue Fox for illegal campaign contributions. Apparently, Fox interviewed an Ohio gubernatorial candidate and allowed him to state where campaign contributions could be sent. This often happens on air. The big difference was that Fox showed a graphic revealing the candidate's website while the donation pitch was being made. The DGA claims that showing the graphic while the candidate was asking for money was basically free publicity amounting to nothing less than an advertisement. There were some other arguments made by the DGA as to why the interview should be considered an "in kind contribution" to the candidate. Read the full report here.

So here's my question. Do you think Fox is acting illegally? Do you think Fox is crossing an ethical line here in promoting republican candidates over democrats either through this latest claim or through the $1 million donation?

P.S. - please remember to write your name at the bottom of your post so i can tell who is who. Also, i've discovered that a spam filter on blogger has "zapped" some of your comments. If you are posting, but not seeing it online, please let me know so i can give credit and address the issue. Thanks.

An Invasion of Privacy?

Recently the LA Times published a list rating teachers on how well they prepared students for the California Standardized Test. The list was released online and immediately became hugely popular. Teachers, as represented by their union, complained that this ranking did not accurately reflect the quality of their work. The School district evaluates the teachers by using more than just that one measure. In other words, the teacher's effectiveness is not based solely on how well their students did on the tests. You can read about this story by clicking here. Many educators argue that the problem with schools today is that teachers are encouraged to teach children how to pass standardized tests while not necessarily focusing on a child's individual needs. Here's my question. Do you think it was an invasion of privacy for the Times to publish this list of individualized names? As a public employee, do the teachers' have an argument that their rankings should not be published? Are they justified in complaining that the story does not accurately reflect their effectiveness in the classroom? How would you feel if you were a government employee and details about your performance were released without your consent?

P.S. please sign your name at the end of the blog reply. I can't tell from some of your usernames who to give credit to. For example, in the last post i'm not sure who Bethann, David, Hunter, Emdaco, or Nick is. We have a couple of David's and a couple of Nick's. Please specify who you are under your reply.

Welcome to the Semester

Hello and welcome to the new semester. This week we start blogging assignments. Each week i'll post a topic and in two paragraphs i'd like you to respond. Every week you respond, you get 4pts. Over time those points will build. So here's the first blog

Dr. Laura, a popular talk radio host, announced recently that after several years she has decided to not renew her radio contract, effectively quitting radio. This comes on the heels of an incident where many accused her of being racist in regards to an incident where she used the "n" word in response to a caller's question.

This is not the first time her comments have gotten her in trouble. In the past, she has made remarks that infuriated homosexuals. That particular incident probably cost her a television show as well as losing several sponsors for her.

Dr. Laura claimed she is quitting radio to regain her first amendment rights. Read this article for her comments. The article also has links to her original radio comments as well as her apology and further commentary. What do you think about both her initial comments that got her into trouble and her reasoning for why she is leaving radio. Was she being racist, was the caller oversensitive, was she sincere in her apology?

That's All, Folks

So that's it. No more blogs. Last week was the last. The last assignment is the final exam. It's already available for you to take. It must be done by 11:55PM on July 30th. No peeking either. Once you begin the exam, the timer starts ticking and you must finish within a certain amount of time. My suggestion would be to print out your slides and organize them well before beginning the exam. Good Luck and thanks for all your input.

Where does it go from here?

So what will happen to the media in the future. A recent poll found that most people think newspapers will be extinct by 2050. Also, this month amazon.com sold more books through their kindle (electronic form) than hardcover books. We've seen chain stores like Sam Goody's go out of business due to most people downloading their music. What do you predict happens next. How will cell phones change? How will radio change? How will television change? What does the future look like to you.

By the way, several of you pointed out that there was a test question on the midterm that referenced a video that was no longer available for download. I've decided to make sure everyone gets a bonus two points added on to their grade.

Was The Decision a Big Deal

Arguably, the big media event last week was the Lebron James announcement of what NBA team he would be following. It all culminated in "The Decision" a program highlighting James and his decision to join The Miami Heat (which many had speculated he would join). ESPN aired The Decision. But apparently The Decision was a somewhat pre-packaged and contrived program originally conceived by Jim Gray. It has been reported that Gray, as interviewer, and Lebron's corporate endorsers, as sponsors of the program, were part of a package deal. In other words, if ESPN wanted exclusive rights to air his announcement, they had to accept his interviewer and sponsors. Many sports critics have commented they were disgusted by the display of corporate driven propaganda which took place on a supposed "sporting news" channel. One such response can be read by clicking here.

Read the article linked above and let me know what you think. Does The Decision make a mockery out of sports? Do you think James will suffer any backlash for it? Does ESPN as an organization employing sports journalists have a responsibility to cover the event impartially or is ESPN just an entertainment channel which we should expect no more from than MTV or VH1?

The Press and the Military

One of the biggest stories related to journalism lately has been General McChrystal's relief from duty and subsequent retirement after a Rolling Stone article quoted him on issues regarding his relationship to President Obama and his administration. Some argued that the General's comments were concerned "off the record." Defense Secretary Gates has revised policy that senior military officials must request approval before giving interviews but that he still wants a good relationship with the press.

Do you think the Rolling Stone reporter should have published McChrystal's comments? Apart from classified information, should the press be willing to publish any information they feel relevant. Some opposing reporters have argued that in order to build rapport and gain access, sometimes you have to hold off on reporting information that you think the public would like to know. What do you think about people telling things to journalists but then saying "this is off the record"?

Stranded on an Island

Hello all,
I'm actually at the beach this weekend on vacation and am writing this at the island's local library. Isn't technology neat. However, we had a bad storm here last night and the island went pitch black. Ahh, stranded on an island (kind of). That brings up an old question. The old "what would you take with you if stranded on an island?"

So here's my media related question to you this week. Write a short paragraph on each:

1. If you were stranded on an island, what magazine would you like to wash up onshore every week? And why?

2. If you were stranded on an island, what one movie would you like to take with you (in a portable dvd player, of course)? And why?

3. If you were stranded on an island, what one album/song would you like to be loaded on the mp3 player you took with you? And why?

Good Luck

Keep your head down

So, i was looking for a topic this week and came across this article regarding PBS's underwriters: the companies or organizations that in part pay for a particular PBS program. In particular, PBS's NewsHour, which brings nightly news, has had underwriters in the oil industry, the banking industry, and in the agricultural industry. The tie-in for me is that the article is from PBS's ombudsman, basically someone PBS hires to make sure they are living up to ethical standards in journalism. I have a very good friend who works for the ombudsman. In fact, i'm going to forward this post to her and see if she has any comments. But don't be intimidated or feel like i'm stacking the deck. Remember, their job is basically to be a watchdog (or watchdawg if you're an MSU or UGA fan).

Click here for the article.

So here's the question. Do you think these advertisers could have a serious effect on Newshour, either directly or indirectly. The producers seem to advocate that no conflict of interest exists. What's your thoughts? Do you trust them? Should you trust them? And we're really not just talking about PBS here but all newsorgs. Have you ever thought about how advertisers could impact your local and national news?

Technology and Teens

According to the latest poll from the Pew Organization, about 75 percent of 12- to 17-year-olds in the United States own a mobile phone, up from 45 percent in 2004. This begs the question, "When do we let Teens gain access to their own personal technology?" What do you think is an appropriate age for someone to get their own cell phone? When do you think a child should have their own computer with an internet connection in their room? When should a child have their own television? Also, how many teens out there are sending or receiving sexual material over their cell phone? Some recent polls indicate 1 out of 3. Why do you think this trend, called "sexting" is becoming so popular?

Also, if your userid does not clearly indicate your full name, please sign your post at the bottom so i know who to give credit to. Last week someone named "joy" posted, but i don't know who to give credit to.

Welcome to the Semester

Hello and welcome to summer semester. Every monday (sometimes tuesday when i'm busy) i'll post a new topic for you to respond to. Your job is to respond to my questions with at least a 2 paragraph contribution. You will have roughly a week to do so. You have to respond before i post the next week's blog or you don't get any points. This website tracks the day and time you respond so there is no going back and posting late. Every blog that you respond to will earn you points and those points will build up over the course of the semester.

You'll have to register with the site in order to post. When creating a username please choose something that i can easily associate with your name. That helps me in awarding points. For example, if you choose "soldier3" then i have no idea who to give your points to. So let's begin with the first topic.

Everyone's concerned about the oil spill in the Gulf. But our own governor has been criticized by some as being too "unconcerned" with it. Gov. Barbour claims that the media has made too much about the situation. View his latest appearance on TV by clicking here. Here are my questions.

1. Do you believe the media is over-reporting on the issue.
2. Do you believe the media's coverage is harmful and irresponsible to our state's tourism industry?
3. Do you believe Gov. Barbour is presenting himself in the best interest of our state? If not, what should he be saying to the media?
4. How would you characterize BP's use of the media during the recent spill?

Finishing the Semester

There's only two points available to finish the blog so i didn't really prepare a question. This one is easy. Just respond back to me with anything to pick up your two points. However i would like to remind you of a few things.

1. The final is available starting on April 22nd. The deadline passes at 11:59PM on April 27th. I will not accept any late grades for ANY REASON.
2. The April mini-monthly is still due by the end of the month.
3. Please consider filling out a course evaluation when AOCE prompts you to do so. Historically speaking, the response rate for online courses is very low. Many online students just forget to fill them out. They are extremely helpful to me. I value all comments, both positive and negative. I would appreciate any response you could give to this.

That being said, i hope you've all enjoyed the course.

Big Story This Week (and it ain't Tiger)

I don't want to preface the following too much. Read this website and watch the video it contains (note: it is war footage and people are killed). I simply want your comments on what you think about wikileaks presenting the information.

Stealing or Not?

The New York Times's ethicist, Randy Cohen, recently published a column in which he stated it was O.K. to illegally download a copy of Stephen King's latest book if you had already purchased a hard copy edition. Why do you think the ethicist believes this? What are the implications for other media? Do you believe his argument to be valid and why?

Book Evolution

Continuing with our discussion from last week, Apple is now taking orders for iPads. And it seems the device is in high demand. Many magazines and traditional print publishers are trying to evolve so that their products are desirable on the iPad. Just like ipods may have changed the way we purchase and play music, the iPad may change the way we purchase and interact with books (if you could still call them that). Read the following and watch the videos contained on the page. Do you think most magazines are headed in the direction the article suggests? Are there reasons why you would want a traditional print copy of a magazine rather than an interactive one? What about books? If books become highly interactive (with audio and video) do they lose some quality that readers want? When do they cease to be "books"? What about textbooks? How might the iPad change the way educators write textbooks?

Is Cable TV Doomed

As access to high speed internet increases, we're seeing several markets shrink and go away. For example, Sam Goody (the record store) recently closed here in Starkville. Blockbuster is rumored to be going bankrupt. No doubt, technologies like the Kindle and the iPad will change how people buy and read books. I'd like you to read the following article. The argument is that cable TV could also take a large hit and internet access expands and people start watching more video content online. How about yourself? Would you be willing to give up Cable TV right now and switch to only internet viewing? NBC already has many of its programs online. Hulu offers a variety of shows. Do you think cable prices and rates will have to change in order to grab back the viewers it may lose? What are your thoughts?

The News in Wonderland

Last week, the LA Times posted an advertisement on its front page which made it look like the ad and the front page news were combined into one. See it here. Some people feel the ad posed no problem and was just another way for a cash-strapped business to generate more money. Some feel it was professionally unethical. What is your opinion? Do you think it's OK for newspapers to sell large ads on its front page? If you had to say it was professionally unethical, what argument would you make?

No Post This Week

Take a Break from the Blog this week. A new post will be here next monday.

Tiger Woods Apology

So Tiger Woods had a "press conference" to give an apology over recent events. I have the video of it embedded below if you have not seen it. Where do you stand on these events. Some say what happens in a marriage is of no interest or concern to others outside the marriage. Some say that such a high profile celebrity who is considered a role model to children should carry themselves with more dignity. Some believe that as a case study in public relations, Woods and his publicists have totally mismanaged the situation and that his silence was more damaging than quickly admitting the truth. Some even criticized that his apology below was an invitation only event with no outside press being allowed and no questions taken after the statement. What do you think about the whole ordeal?







Also what is your response to the video below which was a press conference given by one of Woods's mistresses?

The Winter Olympics

The Winter Olympics are occurring now on NBC. NBC was projected to lose over $200 million on the event because ratings for it were expected to be low. Surprisingly, ratings have been higher than expected. The opening ceremony was viewed by far more people than viewed the last winter olympics opening ceremony. Why do you think so many more people are viewing the events now as opposed to the last time? Have you been watching any of the events and if so, what has stood out to you?

Stranded on an Island

Hello all,
I once saw a news piece where a journalist asked the presidential candidates what book they would take with them to the White House. That's a neat question and it reminded me of that old question, "If you were stranded on an island........"

So here's my media related question to you this week. Write a short paragraph on each:

1. If you were stranded on an island, what magazine would you like to wash up onshore every week? And why?

2. If you were stranded on an island, what one movie would you like to take with you (in a portable dvd player, of course)? And why?

3. If you were stranded on an island, what one album/song would you like to be loaded on the mp3 player you took with you? And why?

Good Luck

Superbowl Advertising

Concerning the SuperBowl, people tend to pay just as much attention to the commercials as the actual game. Two potential commercials are causing quite a stir this year. One ad, promoting a gay dating site was rejected by CBS, citing that the network didn't feel it was appropriate for family viewing. Here's the ad that was rejected.








Given the racy "Go Daddy" commercials and other commercials in the past that have seemed racy, do you think CBS made the right decision in rejecting this ad?



Secondly, CBS is reversing its own past policy of rejecting advocacy commercials, ads paid for by organizations not selling a product but rather promoting a view on a particular issue. Focus on the Family created an anti-abortion commercial, starring Tim Tebow and his mother. My question is the following: if the Superbowl will now have advocacy ads, should all groups have an equal shot at getting airtime? For example, The United Church of Christ was turned down by CBS in 2004 when it wanted to air a Super Bowl ad that celebrated diversity and welcomed gay and lesbian Christians to the denomination. If the church tried to re-air the commercial now, given CBS's recent decision, should it be given air-time?

The Politics of Talk

So this week a media experiment officially failed. Air America, a liberal-oriented national talk radio station, filed for bankruptcy and went off-air. This is especially interesting in a time when liberals control the White House as well as Congress. Some of the most profitable talk radio shows (Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity) are conservative oriented. So here's my question to you. Why do you think conservative based shows are more successful than liberal based shows? I don't necessarily want you to discuss why one political ideology is better than the other. I want you to frame your discussion in terms of media success. If another liberal based talk show were to emerge what do you think it would have to do to be as successful as a Limbaugh or O'Reilly show?

Also, please sign the blog with your full name if it is different than your user id. I can't tell who a person is sometimes when their user id doesn't match my role. For example, someone named Hartman posted last week but i'm not sure who to award the points to.

One Hell of a Week

There are a lot of stories to talk about this week. A lot is going on in the news. Some of it seems humorous such as the Leno-Conan-NBC debacle. But the biggest story is definitely the insufferable Hell that the victims of Haiti have been put through. I hope you've seen some of the coverage. If not, I wish you would. It takes really big events to change how news is covered. The first war in Iraq gave us constant access to the front lines of a War in real time. Katrina gave us real time constant coverage of our own national disaster. I'm left wondering what Haiti will do to news coverage. One thing i've noticed is that the actual journalists are actively engaging with the disaster. Katie Couric held a child while his broken leg was being reset. Both of his parents were killed in the earthquake. She has vowed to do whatever's necessary to care for the boy. CNN medical correspondent Sanjay Gupta worked at a field hospital while reporting and was later called to perform a brain surgery. Anderson Cooper rescued a boy who had been injured in a looting. The newest form of philanthropy evolved when record amounts of money were raised for Haiti simply by people texting the red cross to donate via their cell phone bill. I'm not even sure what to ask but i know that Haiti is THE STORY. Perhaps the biggest story we've had since Katrina. I think i'm a bit biased however. I am a former journalist, who now teaches media studies, so i have an interest in paying attention to this stuff. What about yourself? Have you been watching the coverage? What has interested you? What have you liked or disliked about the story? What are some of the high points and some of the low points? Now that we are a week into this story, do you think interest has lessened? Are journalists becoming too active in their stories? What will you remember?

Welcome to the Semester

So here's the first blog of the new semester. Let's get started by finding out everyone's general view of the media. So answer the following questions for me.
1. What is your favorite news source? Newspaper, television, radio, online?
2. What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of each of the aforementioned news sources?
3. What do you think about bias in the media? Do you notice it, what do you notice, and who do you believe is the most biased?

Here's to hoping we have a productive and informative semester.