Adios, Amigos!

I was going to add this little bit onto my last post, but since my lecture posts aren't always exactly riveting I know most of you just skim over them (don't deny it!).
This is my last post! I was tossing up whether or not to continue after JOUR1111 came to an end, but if you've read any of my posts this semester you'll know I'm horrible at time management and probably wouldn't post anything for another month or so.
Thank you to all the people who read my blog. Thanks to you, I managed to achieve my goal of reaching over 1000 views, which is a great accomplishment for someone who's only just starting out.
I wish you all well (including those people from Russia who make up a lot of my views... I don't know who you are but thanks for reading!) and I shall see you all around!

Adios/Ciao/Au revoir/Tschuess/Aloha?/Auf wiedersehen/Goodbye!
Leila

The Last Lecture

Lecture 11
From the moment I read the title of our last JOUR1111 lecture, I knew it was going to be some speech on how this course offers so much and we can go so far in our careers if we really have the motivation. But to be completely honest, there's only so many times we can hear "it opens so many doors" without rolling our eyes. To the person marking my blog: we have been learning all semester to share our opinions and that is what I'm trying to do now. Don't be mad!
The lecture was presented by Steve Molk, who we were told was one of the top four entertainment bloggers in Australia, and his career through blogging. Hearing how this guy went from being an IT professional to an entertainment blogger that interviews people like Will Anderson is great,  but nothing new. Because of the generally good consistency of our previous lectures, I expected the last one to be... more. Don't get me wrong, I know we are here to learn and our lectures aren't purely for entertainment purposes, but this was by far the least enjoyable lecture of the semester. I felt like this was the first lecture where I walked out without having learnt anything new.
Steve talked about how important what we choose to publish is right now, because it's helping to build our brand for the future. He talked about blogging, the easiness that comes with new media, how the internet is killing magazines and how important it is to write freely now before we have guidelines. We've heard it week after week, it has been completely drilled into our heads and I just wanted to stand up and say "we get it!" (but unfortunately I'm only opinionated when I'm sitting behind a computer screen).

All in all though, I have to say that JOUR1111 is a fantastic subject to take. I know a few people reading this will think I'm just sucking up to the marker, but I genuinely enjoyed the course. So thank you, Bruce, for making my first semester of uni much less torturous than I thought it would be.

One-time-only Rant

Please note: I realize I'm contradicting myself by writing this post. I just want to get it off my chest this one time and then I swear to never speak of such horrors again.

People who are famous for doing idiotic things annoy me. For me, people who are famous are people who've been recognized by the public as having accomplished something. Those people that do one really stupid move that gets them in the papers and then just won't budge from the spotlight? They deserve nothing. I'm talking about the Schapelle Corbys and Corey Worthingtons of the world.

Every time I read something new about Schapelle, I just feel like ripping the newspaper to shreds. So she brought a mother-load of drugs into another country? Let her deal with the consequences without making her famous! Every single newspaper I've picked up int he past week has had a story about her 'imminent' release. She has a book written about her! This girl deserves nothing from us and I think it's disgusting that there are all these pitying articles describing how bad she's doing behind bars. 

Because I don't want to swear on here, I'm going to shut up now. I know I haven't explained myself and I'm sorry, but I feel that if I get started I may go on for a couple thousand words.

Rant over.

Crowned Coolest Hamster on the Planet

After my brief attempt at posting a YouTube video each day completely failed, I kind of gave up on the idea of posting videos. But after watching this video about 10 times everyday, I figured I was under obligation to post it on here. Be prepared to witness the most adorable thing since the Sneezing Panda:

Love the description: "No hamsters were hurt in the making of this video". Priceless.

Myth-o-Maniac?

Everybody who knows me knows about my slight *ahem* fascination with mythology. I take a course on it at uni, I spout random facts about it to people who now think I'm completely crazy and I read about 3 books each week somewhat revolving around it. But never within the two years that I've been scrambling for information about mythology have I read a book as riveting, as tense, as good as 'Starcrossed' (and its sequel 'Dreamless') by Josephine Angelini.
I told myself, when I started this blog, that I wouldn't post reviews on books or movies on here, merely because my taste in entertainment in sometimes questionable at best (and I'll be the first to tell you that). But now, I've come across a book that makes me want to buy a million copies just so I can give it to everyone I cross and have them share in the pure awesomeness that it contains.
Yes, there are romantic themes in 'Starcrossed' and 'Dreamless', but that isn't the reason I love it so much. There's a kick-ass central character who isn't overly-anything. Some authors tend to make their central characters either overly-timid or overly-charismatic, but Josephine Angelini managed to find the perfect balance and have an actually likeable main character.
'Starcrossed' was released last year, and the reason I'm bringing up this series is because its sequel 'Dreamless' was published only a matter of days ago. I bought it and read it within a day. I almost, almost, posted something on Josephine Angelini's Facebook page accusing her of being a scion (descendant of one blessed by the gods) with the power to mesmerize people with her words but I thought I might come off a little crazy so I held myself back (up until now, that is).
I'm not going to say what it's about. If I try and describe the storyline, I know that everyone will that it lame and probably not read it so all I'm going to say is trust me!

And this book isn't the only one incorporating mythology in one way or another. I've seen countless books within the past 6 or so months trying the retell certain stories in a modern way (and as someone who loves to say they discovered something first, I'd like to mention here that I liked mythology way before it was cool) but some of them, to put it bluntly, are either completely confusing or fail abysmally. Last week, I read the Mythos Academy series by Jennifer Estep and, while decently entertaining, it mixed Greek mythology with Norse religion with a few Romans mixed into the storyline just to cover the major bases. The plot had major flaws and you weren't always cheering for the right characters. I don't know how to explain the frustration I had with this series (which is why I don't think I could be a good book reviewer) but suffice to say Estep is no Angelini.

Check out this article about YA books incorporating mythology, it made me smile :)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-parkin/interview-with-josephine-_b_1588387.html?utm_hp_ref=books

Investigative Journalism

Lecture 10
Second last lecture! At least I think so. There may or may not be a lecture next week. We'll see right?
So this week we discussed (I say discussed, but really it was just Bruce talking and us trying to follow) investigative journalism.
When I first signed up for my courses at the start of the year, I noticed that one our subjects for semester two was investigative journalism. At first, I thought it was SO cool.  I thought we were going to go all 21 Jump Street on Brisbane and become undercover journalists or something. But then... uni started.
Don't get me wrong, I love journalism. Definately no doubt in my mind that I will be doing some form of writer as my official 'profession'. However, I do find having to call people I don't know (and asking them a bunch of personal questions) intimidating. Before I spent a year overseas, I was painfully shy. And that isn't an exaggeration, either, because my stomach would literally hurt whenever people outside of my small friend circle made contact with me. Even though I've definately overcome that, it came from a need for survival, not a need to know everything.
So yes, I'm a little daunted by the thought of journalistic investigation and let's just say; this lecture did not help me overcome my fears one single bit.
The following is what I learnt from my lecture (cue everyone exiting this browser...):

• it's aim is to uncover the truth and identify lapses from it
• the best stories are always the ones people want to supress
• it provides a voice for people who don't have one in society
• it takes nothing for granted (be sceptical, not cynical!)
• always check facts!
• assume nothing!
• expect whistleblowers to be/go crazy!
• interview, observe, search documents, go to briefings, check for leaks and (depending on your level of morality) sometimes trespass and steal evidence. Hey, I'm just saying what they told us.
• ask yourself this: does everything line up?

And then you have a story! Easy peasy. Maybe.
We were shown a few examples of investigative journalists who changed the world and, I'll admit, I was definately curious. I looked up "investigave journalism" and had a look at what popped up on good ol' Google. This is an example I found:

"Anna Politkovskaya's reporting in Chechnya and the Russian treatment of the Chechen people led to many investigative reports published in Novaya Gazeta, such as the poisoning of children. Her work was widely recognized by international organizations before she was murdered in 2006. Today an award in her name honors other women who report under circumstances of great danger."

Thanks, Wikipedia. I now know which job I definately won't be chasing.

On the plus side, here's a video of a sheep pushing a fisherman into a lake:
http://www.break.com/index/sheep-attacks-unsuspecting-fisherman-2327209

Until next time,
Leila

Annotated Bibliography

Racism in the Media: Hurricane Katrina

Coleman, R. 2003, "Race and ethical reasoning: The importance of race to journalistic decision making", Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 295-310. 

The author, Renita Coleman, is an Associate Professor at the University of Texas' School of Journalism with a B.A., M.S. and Ph.D. in Journalism (Coleman, R. 2012). Her academic achievements assures credibility in regards to the importance of ethical reasoning to journalistic decision making. In the article, Coleman gives possible explanations behind ethical reasoning, focusing principally on the prejudice against African Americans. Citing the schema theory as the main reason behind race perceptions, the article describes an experiment conducted in which participants were judged on their ethical reasoning (Coleman, R. 2003). Coleman's hypothesis revolves around the theory that a journalist's racial schemes will lead them to make poorer ethical decisions when African Americans are involved, as opposed to Caucasians. The participants, made up of journalist majors at a prominent university, were to judge whether a photo should be released based on content and social issues presented. The race of the subjects in the photographs were altered using technology in order to test Coleman's hypothesis (Coleman, R. 2003). The results were displayed in a table format at the conclusion of the article. Coleman deducted that the study supported her hypothesis as participants showed lower standards of ethical reasoning when the subjects were African American.

Solnit, R. 2009. Four years on, Katrina remains cursed by rumour, cliche, lies and racism, The Guardian. Retrieved from: <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/26/katrina-racism-us-media>

Rebecca Solnit, the writer of this article, has published 13 non-fiction books and prides herself in being an activist and cultural historian. As an editor for Harper's and a frequent writer for political website Tomdispatch.com, Solnit has gained a reputation as hard and just and was named a 'visionary' by Utne Reader Magazine (Solnit, R. 2012). She opens the article with the current racial issue surrounding President Barack Obama's birthplace, but quickly moves on to the issue of racism during Hurricane Katrina in 2005. She describes the racist representation of African American in the media, giving the example that they were often presented as criminals (Solnit, R. 2009). Solnit then goes on to describe the impact this media representation had on the worldwide perception of New Orleans, explaining that it was seen as a prison city and hostile land. This leads us to believe that a lower level of ethical reasoning was used in the writing of this article. The main point expressed throughout the article is that Hurricane Katrina transitioned into a social catastrophe as bad decisions were made by the people in power and rumours were spread by the media. After quick examples of racial prosecution and a summary of the violence during the hurricane (Solnit, R. 2009), Solnit concludes the piece with warnings of natural disasters to come and a question as to how man will act when those storms come.

Jones, V. 2005. Black People "Loot" Food … White People "Find" Food. Huffington Post. Retrieved from: <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/van-jones/black-people-loot-food-wh_b_6614.html>

The author of this short article, Van Jones, has been named by Times Magazine as one of the top 100 influential people in the world. He is the founding president of Rebuild the Dream, as well as being the co-founder of three other successful organizations, including the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights (Jones, V. 2012). These attribute lead him to be a very credible source. Jones begins by stating that Hurricane Katrina has brought out the worst in the media, referring to black people being presented as looters as an example. He compares the way the media has portrayed white people as opposed to black people, specifically saying that white people are seen in a more positive light and displayed as "survivors" whereas black people, who have a very negative image, are branded "criminals" (Jones, V. 2005). The main focus of the article revolves around two separate pictures from yahoo.com with similar actions being presented. One photo, showing white people, is positive, while the other, the focus of this picture being black people, is negative. These photos are a clear example of poor ethical reasoning in relation to race. In his conclusion, he links the bias of these representations to the reason why countries are often divided (Jones, V. 2005).

Rubio, T. 2005. Katrina Uncovers: Activism, Racism and Environmental Justice. National Radio Project. Retrieved from: <http://www.radioproject.org/2005/09/katrina-uncovers-activism-racism-and-environmental-justice/>

International Media Project, the organization behind this radio broadcast, is known for its commitment to journalistic investigation and in-depth analysis. They have been recognized as excellent journalists around the world and have received many different awards for this reason (Law, P. 2012). This leads them to be a credible source for information and a positive light in the media industry. The 29-minute segment starts with a description of the situation in New Orleans after the hurricane, in particular the mistreatment of survivors by the people in power. The first person interviewed in Van Jones, founder of the Ella Baker Center, who expresses his hope for immediate charitable and political action. He discusses human contact and briefly touches on the subject of ethnic groups in the area (Rubio, T. 2005). The second interviewee, Curtis Muhammad, the Director for Community Labor United, briefly discusses plans on redeveloping the city before delving into the topic of racism at 15:54. He expresses anger towards the government and their lack of support, using the comparison of the World Trade Center, and the immediate aid they received, to boost his argument (Rubio, T. 2005). The last speaker, Dr Craig Colten, is a professor at Louisiana State University. He discusses environmental justice and the rebuilding of New Orleans before presenting his concerns for the misconceptions in media coverage in regards to Hurricane Katrina at 24:40. He cites the notion that certain ethnic groups are unwilling to move as incorrect and states that other ethnic groups, giving the examples of Asians and Hispanics, have been ignored by the media throughout the ordeal (Rubio, T. 2005). The prejudice presented by the media in this fashion leads us to believe a lower level of ethical reasoning was used on people of these races. To conclude the piece, the song "George Bush doesn't care about black people" by The Legendary K.O. is played.

Reference List:

• Coleman, R. 2003, "Race and ethical reasoning: The importance of race to journalistic decision making", Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 295-310. 
• Coleman, R. 2012, Renita Coleman, School of Journalism, The University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved from: <http://journalism.utexas.edu/faculty/renita-coleman>
• Jones, V. 2005. Black People "Loot" Food … White People "Find" Food. Huffington Post. Retrieved from: <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/van-jones/black-people-loot-food-wh_b_6614.html>
• Jones, V. 2012. Van Jones. Huffington Post. Retrieved from: <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/van-jones>
• Law, P. 2012. About Us, National Radio Project. Retrieved from: <http://www.radioproject.org/aboutus/>
• Rubio, T. 2005. Katrina Uncovers: Activism, Racism and Environmental Justice. National Radio Project. Retrieved from: <http://www.radioproject.org/2005/09/katrina-uncovers-activism-racism-and-environmental-justice/>
• Solnit, R. 2012. Bio, Rebecca Solnit. Retrieved from: <http://www.rebeccasolnit.com/bio>
• Solnit, R. 2009. Four years on, Katrina remains cursed by rumour, cliche, lies and racism, The Guardian. Retrieved from: <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/26/katrina-racism-us-media>

Apologies & Agendas

I think we've all gathered by now that I fail terribly at keeping promises. So I have decided that from here on out, I will no longer promise anything (apart from, you know, my promise not to keep promises. Following?). Who knows, maybe the spontaneity of my posts will keep people on their toes and... yeah, I've got nothing. Let's just see what happens, shall we?

Lecture 9
"The press may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about" - Bernard Cohen


This week's lecture was all about the confusion between reality and the media's version of reality. The media's job is to present us with facts on issues from all around the world. However, newspapers almost always have an agenda spurring their articles.
We learnt about the four following types:

1. Public Agenda
2. Policy Agenda
3. Corporate Agenda
4. Media Agenda

They're all pretty self-explanatory. Throughout the lecture I noticed that one thing in particular was repeated over and over, and can sum up the lecture very neatly: the more coverage a story receives, the more important it is deemed by the public.Not only that, but journalists filter and shape reality in order for their story to fit perfectly.

Another major part of our lecture focused on the Agenda Setting Family:

1. Media Gatekeeping (individual control of stories and their release)
2. Media Advocacy (purposeful promotions)
3. Agenda Cutting (serious issues taking a backseat to minor stories - e.g. Brangelina's wedding)
4. Agenda Surfing (stories that follow the crows - e.g. KONY)
5. Diffusion of News (how, where & when a story is released)
6. Portrayal of an issue (e.g. Muslims and Aboriginals)
7. Media Dependence (more dependence = more susceptibility)

As effective as this system may seem, it doesn't always work. People can be ignorant of details and therefore brush stories aside.Sometimes, a large group have already made up their mind about a certain subject and that would therefore weaken the impact. Also, as much as some journalist would love it to be true, we cannot create problems, nor can we conceal them. 

Here's an article I found from last year, talking about Julia Gillard and some of the political action she's taken and how how agenda has affected those stories:

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3272258.htm

The lecture on agenda setting was one of our last. You'd think that after all these weeks, that we would get bored of lectures on various journalism aspects, but apparently there's a lot to learn and it's all good stuff. 

And for the few people who have told me I disappointed them (not sure whether you were joking or not, actually), here's something to cheer you up:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/If-youre-feeling-down-heres-a-picture-of-a-shaved-llama/212205482177637

Until next time!

"Do you wanna see me cry right now?"

You don't have to know me well to know I'm a massive fan of the Hunger Games. So when my sister showed me the following video (sorry, couldn't figure out how to embed it so it's just a link), I thought it was cruel yet hilarious at the same time.

http://www.jest.com/video/157589/hunger-games-trivia-prank

I can only imagine how frustrated I would be if someone tried to pull that on me, so watching it done to other people is, admittedly, quite satisfying. 

p.s. I've now posted 3 times in the same week! Who's proud? I am!

Let's start again, shall we?

Okay, so now that I've been assured that we can post about whatever we want by my tutor (hi, Carmel!), I've decided to share some of my all time favourite YouTube videos with you all because I want each and every one of you to laugh as much as I did. Because I am hopelessly slack at posting blogs, I want to try and post one video a day. Enjoy!

First, let's start with the best of the best: "My Daughter Has Chosen The Dark Side"

It's not even her evil laugh that makes this video awesome, but the innocent look she gives at the end.

Big Questions

So much for improving my habits! Procrastination has once again taken its toll and I am now far behind in uni work. Now, yet again, I have to write two lecture posts in one and hope that I can catch up on all the rest. Don't worry, I'm mentally hitting myself, too.


Lecture 8
This weeks lecture brought about a brand new perspective to me. I'd always known journalism and photojournalism were hard jobs mentally, morally and sometimes physically. But this week, I was faced with most journalists' biggest internal debate: ethics.
We were shown 10 different advertisements and were told to write down whether we thought they were ethical or not and in good taste or just plain tacky. There were plays on words and on images. There were confronting scenes, offending sayings and moments that just made you shake your head.
Everyone has a different sense of right and wrong, so who decides whether an ad should be allowed to air or if it should be disgraced and never be viewed by the public? They get it wrong sometimes, too. Take the infamous "Where the bloody hell are you?" ad starring one of my least favourite people, Lara Bingle. Australian tourist companies spent thousands upon thousands of dollars creating this short television commercial promoting Australia for foreign countries, only to have it thrown back in their face. The ad was banned in the UK because of the word 'bloody' (though I might mention here that Ron Weasley uses the word 'bloody' far too often to be offensive to everyday Brits).
It all depends, surprise surprise, on who you work for. Different work places have a different code of ethics, most of them revolving around one of these three ideas:

1. Deontology - following rules, principles and duties. 
2. Consequentialism - getting a 'good' or 'right' outcome, no matter the means of achieving it. Or
3. Virtue - 'goodness' that comes from habits or dispositions of character.

Something that made an impact on me during this lecture, was when Bruce said, "ethics is rarely a choice between absolute right and absolute wrong, but choosing the lesser of two evils."

In our tutorial yesterday, we were shown examples of photojournalism where the photographer chose to capture a moment instead of helping it. The most famous of these being, of course, Kevin Carter's picture in the Sudan:

This young girl was unable to reach the food station not too far away and was being circle by a vulture. Even though he scared the vulture away after taking the photo, he did not help the girl because he was under strict instructions not to touch any of the people there. Carter was harshly criticized for this moment, and ended up taking his life a year later due to the pressure. 

It's the biggest question any of us will have to face, and we won't all choose right.

Lecture 9

On a lighter note! The week that followed, we discussed news values and what you need to write a good story. Millions of events happened everyday. Out of those, only a tiny portion will be seen as potential news stories, and only a fraction of those will actually be published. The four greatest factors to any story are the following:

1. Impact,
2. Audience Identification,
3. Pragmatics, and
4. Source Influence.

News Values are not the same across every country and every news service. There is a long list of factors that a news company may value. For example:

• negativity
• proximity
• recency
• currency
• continuity
• uniqueness
• simplicity
• personality
• expectedness
• elite nations or people
• exculsivity
• size
• visual attractiveness
• entertainment
• importance
• weight
• controversial
• emotional
• usefulness
• educational value
• good news
• bad news
• celebrity
• follow-up
• newspaper agenda

It may seem like a long list, but these are only a few of the possible values deemed important by different news services. Mix a few of them up and BAM! you've got a news story. 

That's all folks, hopefully I'll get my head together and post something else soon. Until next time!

Factual Storytelling Assignment

Hidden Memories of an Untold Moment

"I woke up at about 1am and my bed was covered in blood. It was so awful, I went straight to the bathroom and there was... everything... everywhere. I stayed up all night freaking out. I washed my sheets and just sat there and cried."

Cast your mind back to your teenage years. When did you feel the biggest sense of elation? Of relief? Of freedom? Some would say the first time they drove a car, others the days they moved out of their parent's old house. But most people would say that it was when they graduated high school and started their lives as adults.

For 17-year-old Alicia*, her graduation memories are anything but joyous. Instead, they are filled with uncertainty, a sense of loss, and above all, helplessness. The reason why is that two days after her graduation, Alicia miscarried a baby she didn’t even know she was carrying.

To add to the mental trauma, Alicia was told in her early teenage years that she was incapable of carrying a child. After multiple tests and continuous visits to the doctor in her second year of high school, Alicia was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome and severe blood clots. 

“I was the type of child that would carry around a doll and nurture it as my child,” Alicia confided; “I’ve always known motherhood was in my future and when I was told I couldn’t have kids… I was heartbroken.”

In her senior year, Alicia was prescribed a new contraceptive pill to control the symptoms of her polycystic ovarian syndrome and began to experience slight weight gain, morning sickness, nausea and infections. This led to her missing crucial end-of-year exams and a stressed Alicia did not think to question the origins of her symptoms. Imagine her alarm when she wakes covered in blood two days after graduation.

“The first thing I did the next day was go see Daniel,” she says. “He had no words and I could just see in his face how distraught he was.”

Daniel*, her long term boyfriend, was set to go visit family two days later. Alicia was left to face the doctor’s appointment by herself, in a state of nervousness and distress. The doctor, a man who is trained to handle situations such as these with delicacy, didn’t take into account Alicia’s emotional state and treated her condition with a careless attitude.

“He didn’t seem to care at all what I was going through,” she confessed. “He wasn’t sensitive to the situation or supportive in any way. A pap smear confirmed what had happened and that was it, he saw it as a crisis averted.”

Even after the shock of miscarrying this child, Alicia was left with guilt from her behaviour during the time of her unknown pregnancy. As a young adult in her final year of school, Alicia indulged in vices such as junk food, alcohol and the afore mentioned contraceptive pill. All of these things would have a negative effect on the development of a foetus in a healthy uterus, let alone one suffering the effects of severe polycystic ovarian syndrome.

Alicia felt as though she could confide in neither friends nor family because she felt she could not live up to the high standards both in her schooling and private life if she admitted to being sick. Her family, as well as the majority of her friends, had very idealistic and traditional views on children born out of wedlock. Alicia chose to only confide in two people: Daniel and a close friend. Knowing who to trust in this situation, for Alicia, was near impossible.

In the horrific moment of losing her child in her own home, Alicia began to suspect what had happened and only felt comfortable confiding in Daniel.

“When the doctor confirmed I’d miscarried, I felt like the world had turned on its head,” said Alicia in our interview. “I felt like I’d failed everyone’s expectations of me, and I’d failed Dan and our child. I thought everything was my fault.”

She was affected so badly by the traumatic experience that it took a year to confide in anyone else. Her parents, till this day, still don’t know. Her only support has been Daniel, who has given their relationship all of his strength and patience.

“We love each other,” Alicia says simply. “He’s been my rock through the entire thing.”

Alicia recently celebrated her anniversary with her boyfriend and says children are definitely still in the cards for the future.

“Maybe it’s a good thing that this happened,” says Alicia bravely. “At least now I know that kids are still a possibility for me and I wouldn’t have to go to any further measures.”

*Names have been changed

Short Article Rant

I just wanted to quickly draw your attention to the following article:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/victims-just-like-hitler-youth-says-mass-killer-20120417-1x5mm.html


When I first read it, I was admittedly confused. The boasting, the lack of guilt... everything about this guy has me disgusted. But what really bugged me was this:

"He could no more be called evil than US commanders in World War II who dropped the atomic bomb to save lives, killing 300,000 people but with noble motives, he said."

A statement like that is bound to make people all over the world doubt his convictions. I know that newspapers have obligations to print what they know in order to share it with the public but, in my opinion, stories that could lead to sympathizing with a mass killer are simply not to be published. I'm not saying that everyone will suddenly say "oh, okay then, if that was your reason for killing ll those people, you can go", but people who were deeply effected by groups such as the Hitler Youth could ultimately start questioning the unrighteousness of his actions.

I don't know what went on in that camp, all I know is that nobody deserves to have their life taken away from them at an early age, especially not by an egotistical madman.

Procrast...

Last night, I was speculating out loud what to write on my blog that wasn't journalism-related. After offhandedly saying "I'll do it tomorrow", my mother asked me why I couldn't do it that night. My answer? "I'll be too busy watching 'Smash'".
I always think i'll have time to do my work tomorrow or the day after, yet here I am, at work, writing a blog post that I should have written weeks ago and didn't have the motivation to. And what's the motivation now? A Friday deadline. Oh lordy.
I originally started to write this post so that I could blame the entertainment industry for my lack of effort, but really they're just a means of procrastination. And I'm told again and again to just write an episode review if I watch so much television. But that's not the type of writing I would do volountarily, so no, I won't be writing about how flawless Katharine McPhee is or my sister wanting to skip over most of the songs to keep her sanity intact.

You know what's funny? I started writing this post nearly two hours ago. Procrastinating from writing a post about procrastination. How ironic. Since starting this post, I have looked up cast members for Smash, Girls and kids. I have made myself a coffee (even though it's boiling out today), chatted with my sister and served a few customers here and there. Anything except writing a dreaded post. It's weird because I do actually like writing, I just... don't write. Often.
Did you know that just over 30 years ago, only 5% of the US population (couldn't find Australian stats, sorry!) admitted to serial procrastination. Today, 26% do (most of that percentage being students). So I've decided to take charge! Woo, female power of the mind and all that. I need to start getting serious. So after going to my dear friend Google for suggestions, this is what I've decided to do:

1. Make every project seem more important than it actually is. If I think that I won't be able to graduate without reading the Odyssey books 5-9, then I'll read the damn Odyssey books 5-9.
2. Don't watch shows that you don't love (too strong? try like a lot), because shows do deteriorate in quality over time, even if it was hilarious at the start (I'm looking at you, How I Met Your Mother)
3. Get excited about projects! Woo, journalism! 

And that's all I've got so far. Hints and tips are welcome with open arms. Maybe I'll write again soon, if this works. If I don't, you know I've failed. Wish me luck!

References:

http://www.effective-time-management-strategies.com/procrastination-statistics.html

http://lesswrong.com/lw/3w3/how_to_beat_procrastination/

Why the ABC trumps all other channels

Lecture 7

          Up until recently, I had no idea that there was a difference between the way Channel 7 was run and the ABC. They were all television channels to me, one and the same. After our lecture on Public Media on Monday, I now know that isn't true. 

           What I gained from Monday's lecture is very simple:

1. The government doesn't fund public media outlets (such as the ABC and SBS) and therefore has no influence over it.
2. The government doesn't like not having control over pretty much anything, which is why we don't hear a lot of politicians praising these outlets.
3. Public media outlets put importance over interest. Meaning that if something important needs to be said, they will most likely jump straight on it, no matter who it effects. 
4. There are less adds than on commercial media outlets (such as channels 7,9 and 10), because it's less associated with profit. It's purpose is to serve.

           When I heard this (I was blissfully ignorant before that day), my respect immediately increased. My initial impression of the ABC was that it was a channel for kids and seniors, not interesting for anyone my age. But now, as I gain interest in many different aspects involved in journalism, the ABC is the only channel I watch. Of course, I do also watch television shows that are streamed online, but the only time I physically turn on the television, it's not watch a program on the ABC. 

            After all, a broadcaster that can make a politician say this can't be too bad can it?:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-10-21/liberal-mp-sprays-gay-bc-and-lunatic-ideas/2306554

A Long Awaited Post

             I know, I know, my posts are irregular and (this one in particular) long overdue. I was supposed to write about my sound lecture two and a half weeks ago, yet only got around to listening to it last night. At least now I cant blog about both of the last lectures in one post, right? Be prepared for what could be a very long babble.

Lecture 5

"Radio is the theatre of the mind"

             As this lecture was all about sound, we were told to stay home and listen to the podcast to understand exactly what the lecturers were trying to say. The podcast, split into two parts, was all about how to carry an interview over the radio without boring the guest, yourself and, most importantly, the audience.
             The first part was an interview with Richard Fidler from ABC Conversations. He talked about how he got into radio after first being on TV, about what he needed to learn to be a successful broadcaster and pretty much just how to understand radio. These are the main things he learnt:

1. Radio is a very different medium as people can't be distracted from images you put on the screen, so you have to learn to be warm and genuine to draw in audiences.
2. Radio has to sound almost like a voice inside your head. It works best if the listener believes they are part of the conversation and not just eavesdropping.
3. Use humour to make your guest feel more relaxed. The more relaxed they are, the more the walls come down, the more they tell on the show.

             The best part of his interviews, he said, was when the guests let their guard down so much that they remembered and talked about things that they had completely forgotten themselves. And I agree completely, because it's a great feeling to know that somebody can trust you with certain information and if he can get people comfortable on air, while they are being broadcasted to the whole of Australia, he must be extremely good at what he does. I've never listen to Conversations, but I admit that this has piqued my interest and after I finish writing this I'm going to try and find past interviews and see if there's anyone I recognize. 

              The second part of the podcast was an interview with Steve Austin from ABC radio. He talked about struggles with identity at a young age, not knowing where his life was going and finally deciding on being a radio broadcaster. He is a great example for perseverance. He grovelled, he volounteered, and he finally got into radio (and at the ABC, no less!).

               His advice: know what the listener wants. Different people listen at different times and for different reasons. Not many 50 year-olds would want to listen to an interview with Lady Gaga, just like not many 18 year-old would want to listen to an interviw with Julia Gillard. People have different interests, and it's important to accommodate for as many as possible.

               Both interviewers agreed that giving the guest space was the key to them opening up. Don't do anything on radio that you wouldn't do in real life. Be human, because humans are all emotional creatures and driven by experiences. 

               All in all, this broadcast was about making interviewees comfortable enough to open up on air. A useful skill to have, no doubt.

Lecture 6

               Last week's lecture was one of the most interesting ones to date. It was all about the Australian media landscape and commercial media VS public media.

               Commercial media, for example Channel 9, 7 and 10, is all profit-driven. It's not funded by the government and all about generating a high audience. There are three forms of commercial media:

1. Subscription (E.g. Foxtel)
2. Sponsored (E.g. Channel 9)
3. Subsidized (Government funded)

               A big question posed was whether media outlets could really deliver in both commercial and social functions or if it really is all about the money. TV broadcasters are always saying that they are the ones we should trust, but the the question of spread of information VS making money has never been satisfyingly answered. The media has a responsibility towards its viewers to always be truthful, comprehensible, intelligent and generous. 

               One of the most important areas of media is a "Public Sphere" - where audiences can debate freely and form public opinions. A big part of the news is what everyone thinks about it. IT wouldn't be news at all if nobody reacted to it, would it? There's always what's called an "Ethical Wall" between commercial and social media. Commercial involves advertising and sales, whereas social is all about editorials. Both thrive on public opinion.

               Also mentioned were the new social controls, such as video game ratings and deciding which movies are released in our country (an example being "The Human Centipede" - or the the "Hungry, Hungry Catapiller", as Bruce called it). There was recently an attempt to censor all computers in the country, which led up to the "No Clean Feed" campaign to secure our freedom of choice. Also mentioned was government funding of certain newspapers and, therefore, government control over news release. Licensed Journalism, which doesn't exist in Australia anymore, still remains an issue to areas such as Indonesia and East Timor and is another example of government control.

               Profit over quality tends to be the way media outlets think. Commercial medias are dumbing down (looking at you, Today Tonight) and a 'desire to please' is taking over. But what can we do? With the internet growing bigger every day, it's easier to just click button and have everything in front of you instead of waiting around a hoping it may come up on your television screen.

               To everybody who is still reading this: I congratulate you. Thanks for sticking by me. Hoefully I'll post again soon, but to everyone who knows me, you know that's unlikely. But keep checking! I might surprise you ;)

My Sister the iFreak

Did you know?

• In the U.S.A., more people own iPads, iPhones and iPod touches than the entire population of Australia?
• Australia has the second highest iOS market penetration in the world?
• Between 2010 and 2011, mobile internet usage almost doubled?

If you need any more proof that Steve Jobs' Apple Empire is taking over the world of technology, just look to your family members to see how many iOS products they own.

At dinner a couple of nights ago, my sister, Tess, proudly proclaimed to the table that she was an 'iFreak'. I'd never heard the term before, but I quickly caught on to what it meant. In her lectures, she told me, she sits with her macbook in front of her, her iPad next to it and her iPhone in her hand. The macbook, I can understand. The iPhone, also understandable (though she mainly uses it to take photos and play DrawSomething). But the iPad? iPads are pretty much just bigger versions of iPhones. You want to see something on a bigger screen and in higher resolution? Look it up on your macbook!

Every single member of my immediate family owns an Apple product. In my parents' case (and also mine!), the only one they own is a good, old-fashioned, music-playing iPod. Emily, the eldest, works at a Vodafone store and refuses to purchase any iOS product purely based on the number of people who want them. "People come in and say iNeed an iPhone, like they think they're being original," she said. "but the only reason they NEED it is because it's what's in fashion at the moment". Tess, trying to smart, said that the reason she had these three gadgets just "because it looks pretty". I think it's safe to say she falls into the 'iNeed' category. 

My last sister, Chloe, also seems to have her iPhone permanently attached to her hand. But with the third highest score on Sneezies in the world, it's to be expected, isn't it?

Personal Media Use and Production Diary

Initial Diary (in minutes)

*Number of texts sent and received. NOT represented in minutes.

Graph Demonstrating Media Usage

The Social Networks
Facebook and Twitter

Facebook, for me, is purely for social interaction. Last year, I lived in Germany for a year on exchange and now, if I want to chat to someone I met last year, Facebook is the easiest method. I'm able to stay in contact with my friends and see what that have been doing by browsing photos that they have uploaded, reading statuses and posting and commenting on their activities. It's incredibly useful, easily accessible and, best of all, free. I wouldn't say that I spend a spectacular amount of time on Facebook, especially considering a lot of people I know, but I'm definitely guilty of checking my notifications several times a day.
When I checked the survey our class participated in and saw this:

I admit that I was shocked. Not because 97.2% of our cohort had a Facebook account, but because 2.8% didn't. I managed to get this idea into my head that everybody on the planet has a Facebook. When I thought about it, I did slap myself in the head a bit for being so ignorant. Hopefully the influence of Facebook will die down a bit within years to come, before all our fingers are glued to out keypads.

The main purpose of Facebook is definitely not news. I do occasionally read online articles through Facebook when a link is shown in my News Feed, but the majority of articles usually date back a few years and have only popped up on my home screen because someone has read it and thought it either amusing or interesting and has decided to post it. It's not the greatest place for keeping up with current affairs and I would therefore not count it as one of my news sources.

 I had never used Twitter before JOUR1111. I was unfamiliar with #hashtags and Retweeting. In fact, I was in exactly the same position as over 70% of our cohort:

I set upmy account in my first tutorial, got used to it, played around with it a little bit and slowly started to get attached. You can actually see in my media diary that as those 10 days progressed, I was logged in for a little bit longer each day. I never saw the point of Twitter before this course but, almost immediately after signing up, I started to see the benefits. Thanks to the thousands upon thousands of worldwide news feeds, I have managed to stay connected not only to my friends but to the rest of the world. News feeds all get updated on a regular basis so you always get that constant flow of information. Twitter has definitely become one of my main sources of News. It may not always be detailed or opinionated, but it helps me with staying current in regards to worldwide news.

The Visuals
YouTube, Television and Broadcast News

Visual media outlets take up a big part of my daily media usage. YouTube, like Facebook, is an outlet that I use everyday. Most of the videos I watch tend to lean towards the comedic genre, but I also watch a lot of celebrity interviews, snippets from TV shows and movie trailers. I would have to say that YouTube is one of my main sources of information. After I search something on Google, I search it on YouTube. I find that it offers a very wide range of opinions, as videos can be posted from anybody with access to a computer. When watching a video that describes an issue from one point of view, there will almost always be contradictory comments underneath from other users. Are these opinions biased? Most definitely. But it's one of the easiest ways to discover the general viewpoint of the public and also a way to link to other information.

I rarely turn on the TV. If I want to watch a particular television show, I choose to watch it online because of two simple reasons:

1. No ad-breaks.
2. I can watch whatever I want, whenever I want.

I've been trying, because of JOUR1111, to keep up with the news, and so I try to watch the news a few times a week. As you can see from my table, I only managed to watch it three times.
Obviously, broadcast news is easily available and an easy way to keep track of current affairs, but I find that I can barely sit through one news segment, let alone five or six. I think it's because when I watch the news on television, I don't choose what I see. Whereas with online news and newspapers, I decide what I want to read, how long I want to spend reading it and if it's worth looking into in more detail.

On the other hand, I watch an exceeding amount of online shows. I didn't realize before I had this diary, but now I see that I can watch up to three hours of shows in one day and, for me, I think it's a little too much. I see that I'm not entirely alone in this:

Due to the wide range of shows available through the internet, I'm honestly not surprised at the amount of time our generation can spend watching TV. The shows that I watch, however, are all fiction. Their sole purpose, for me, is entertainment. They neither help me with university nor inform me on any news whatsoever.





The Online Informants
blogger.com and Online News

The only time I ever attempted to start a blog before JOUR1111, was last year, when I went to Germany. I managed to post twice: once in my fifth week and the second time the day after, correcting my original post.  Now that it's part of my assessment, I've been trying to post at least twice a week, but it's hard. I realize the importance of publishing your work, and so I try to get inspiration by looking at other blogs and therefore spending time browsing through different blogs. I don't, however, check news blogs. I know that they are available, I even know the names to a few of them but, for me, blogs are not the best way to keep up with news. The people who write blogs are generally untrained and biased. They are the people who have very strong opinions and need to be heard. Of course, there are bound to be blogs out there that are accurate and well written, but I prefer not to trust any of them. The way I see it, if you have access to a blog, you have access to the internet. If you have access to the internet, you therefore have access to online news, which much more accurate and informative than blogs.

Online News is definitely one of the main places I get my information. Because I follow so many different news channels on Twitter, they always link me to articles that I'm interested in. I find it the easiest manner in which I can get informed, as well as the fastest. If I were looking for a news story on a particular subject, I could just type the subject into Google, add 'news article' on the end, and in a matter of seconds: BAM! there are 23486348 results.


The Readers
Newspapers, magazines and general reading

I don't read the newspaper often, but when I do, I read it all the way through. At the cafe that I work, we get The Courier Mail every day and, when we have a slow day, I have time to sit at a table and read the whole thing through. It may seem to some people that newspapers are outdated, yet a surprising amount of JOUR1111 students still read the paper:

Although it's not the most popular media device, over 50% of our cohort still read the newspaper.I find that it's one of the only places where you can get information on everything from politics to sport and from real estate to holiday deals, so it's very useful for a general knowledge of current events. I find that when I read the newspaper I skip over a lot of the talk of politics and I don't think I could read a sports article all the way through due to a plain lack of interest.

As well as the newspaper, we also have a large amount of magazines at the the Cafe. However, because of the type of people that come into the store, the only magazines we have on offer are of two genres: celebrity gossip and motorcycles. As I'm not really keen on bikes, I always end up reading the celebrity magazines, in particular: OK! Famous, Who, Grazia and Women's Day. They don't particularly help with events other than celebrity scandals, but in regards to entertainment, I can confidently say that I am (almost) fully informed.

I also read a lot of fiction books. Before I started at UQ, I found that I could read up to five books a week. Now, with my work load and the amount of study I try to get in, I only read about one book a week. Although I may read a lot, the books I tend to lean towards have little to nothing to do with anything current in the world. There are few with themes that are very present in today's society, but nothing directly relating to recent events.




The Communicators
Skype, email, texts and calls


Texting, calling and emailing are things I do pretty much everyday. It's the easiest method of communication and I therefore use it to organize things with friends, ask them a question or even just for a chat. I use Skype at least once a fortnight, since most of my friends live thousands of kilometers away from me. I am the proud owner of a smart phone, and I can therefore do all four of these things from my mobile.

Only 22.7% of our cohort didn't have an internet-enabled smart phone. It's getting easier and easier to stay connected with people all over the world.
Since news can spread easily though word-of-mouth, phones and emailing are a great way to hear about news. Assuming, that is, that your friends also pay attention to what's going on in the world. But other than that one little factor, these four methods of communication have little to do with journalism.




All Together Now
Quick summary of main points

• My main news sources are online news, Twitter and the newspaper
• I joined Blogger and Twitter for the first time after starting JOUR1111
• Facebook is mainly used to stay connected with friends, not news
• Blogs are good for publishing my work, but cannot be trusted for news because of biased writers
• I watch more shows online than on television
• I like reading newspapers for a broad view on today's world
• Skype, emails, texts and calls are mostly used for communication, and have little to do with journalism

Which picture can tell 1000 words?

            Lecture 4
Monday's lecture focused primarily on picture stories and moving pictures. Every good article needs a great picture, just as every news segment on TV requires meaningful footage.. These are what makes a good photo:

• framing
• focus
• angle & point of view
• exposure (light)
• timing (shutter speed)
• capturing 'the moment'

The example given was a picture taken at Jonathon Thurston's Uncle's funeral. The picture showed immense emotion and was beautifully framed by a window/wall cutout. Captured with a camera phone, this picture proved that being in 'the moment' is THE key to mastering photojournalism.

It was interesting in our tutorial when we were given a completely different article about ridding Brisbane streets of old gum, to see that the photo can be the decider on whether or not someone reads a certain article. I doubt I would ever read an article on chewing gum, but the final picture chosen had all the key points mentioned above and, if I were at home and not in a tutorial, it would have drawn me into the article. 

Since I've started my Journalism degree, I've realized that I now assess how every journalist pulls off their articles. Whether it's a headline that falls flat, a picture that doesn't make sense or even an article that doesn't explain the 5 Ws and the H, I will constantly check whether they could have made it better in any way. Sounds a bit arrogant, coming from a 1st year university student, doesn't it? But I'm learning. And this course has got me thinking. A little too much.

Facebook: The Good and the Idiots

I was going through old newspapers the other day and came across and edition of The Sunday Mail (11/03/12) that had a few articles about Facebook here and there.
Thanks to JOUR1111, I've been having to record my media usage for a few days now and I'm genuinely surprised at the amount of time I spend on Facebook. Not because I spend a lot of time on it, but because I don't. I would go on and analyze my habits regarding Facebook, but I think I'll save that for my actual assessment. What I wanted to talk about was Facebook itself and, more specifically, this article:

Facebook makes us happy... does that mean that it's okay to log on as often as we do? Some people would argue that smoking weed or excessively drinking alcohol makes them happy and relaxed, does that mean that those shouldn't be a problem either? Now, I'm not classifying Facebook as a "dangerous" addiction (like smoking and alcoholism), but the more Facebook is updated, the more Apps you can play online, the more possibilities that are opened to us from this social networking site, the more people are going to be glued to their computer screens, missing all the action going on around them and focusing on their own imaginary world.
I am not telling everyone to stop going on Facebook. As much as I like to bash it, I would be lost without Facebook, just like nearly every other user out there. I'm just saying that just because something makes us happy,as this article suggests, that does not mean that we should get into the habit of using it excessively.

On another, more amusing, note! I also found this article which I would like to share with you all:

I don't really need to say anything else, do I? Being married to two people may not a smart idea, but making it known over Facebook? Oh lordy.

Let's Talk About Text, Baby.

        Lecture 3
        We had a guest lecturer this week: Skye Doherty. A well traveled reporter, Ms Doherty was working on Fleet Street, in London, when the News of the World scandal erupted. Hearing her take on what had happened and (better yet) how it happened, was really interesting. I don't want to go into it too much because that's not what this post is about, but hearing about it from someone who experienced it first hand and watched everything fall to pieces was really the best way we could have learnt about it (and if anybody wants to know, feel free to ask me).
        The lecture this week was on text, and how we use it and manipulate it as journalists. Obviously, everyone with half a brain knows what text is (and if you don't, it's what you're looking at right now) but what people don't understand is how clever journalists/columnists/authors/anybody who writes professionally are by being able to twists certain words and phrases in order to draw you in and make you hear what they have to say.

         I'm going to show you the example they showed us on headlines and see if you understand straight away how much of a genius the writer of that headline is:

           For those of you who don't understand... think Mary Poppins. 

           Get it yet? Don't worry, it took me a while too.

           Okay, for those of you who still don't get it, it's a play on the word 'supercalifragilisticexpialidocious',from the musical Mary Poppins. Even though the definition (fantastic) is irrelevant (unless it was used sarcastically), you've got to admit that this is pretty impressive. You might sit there for a second, mull it over in your head, realize how they've used word play to draw people in and laugh for a while because you can admit that this was written by a very witty journalist (possibly with a passion for either musicals or nannies).

            I think I may just finish here because, in my opinion, this example pretty much summed up everything I wanted to say. We did also discuss other things such as layouts in the newspapers and online, but I definitely think this was the most interesting part of the lecture. Even more interesting than the girl behind me, who seemed to either be having a panic attack or giving birth and had to be taken out of the theater in a wheelchair half-way through.

             And with that, I bid thee farewell. Goodnight y'all!

It's an Art.

Yesturday afternoon, a customer at my dad's cafe jokingly complained that we always had the same 'leaf' pattern drawn on the top of out coffees. He said that next time he ordered a coffee, he expected a heart.

Challange accepted.

That night, my parents and I spent at least one hour going through YouTube videos of Latte Art, seeing which ones we could do without years of experience. The result:

Poor quality photo, excellent quality coffee.
Expect to be seeing a few more of these photos because I am going to be doing a lot of experimenting in the next couple of weeks.

Leila

Welcome to the World of Journalism! Now get to work.

"Journalism can never be silent: that is its greatest virtue and its greatest fault. It must speak, and speak immediately, while the echoes of wonder, the claims of triumph and the signs of horror are still in the air." - Henry Anatole Grunwald

          When I applied for a Bachelor of Journalism, I did it with the intention of getting my opinion heard. I wanted to write about things that interested me and have them impact the world in a small yet significant way.

           I didn't know what to expect. Were we going to be studying politics and writing about who 'outrageously' said what to whom? Were we going to be buying 100 pairs of shoes, testing them for both comfort and style and then later writing an ingenious article about how shoes are the windows to a woman's soul? Whatever we were going to do, I was up for it.

          What I didn't expect was to be thrown into the world of Journalism head-first with nothing but a computer and the means to start a blog. "Let's see what you can do," we were told. Oh, I'll show you what I can do. Dream career, here I come.

Lectures 1 & 2 - A Promising Start.

         Lecure 1

        On Monday the 27th of February, I rocked up to the Schonell Theatre out of breath and a little red in the face. The bus that was supposed to get me to university 25 minutes early had been 25 minutes late, which meant I was already late the moment I stepped off the bus. After spending a year in Germany, punctuality had become my forte and I was not happy that I was being thwarted by a mere bus. Taking the first seat I find, I introduce myself to the girl next to me and begin to relax when I discover that I haven't missed any of the lecture at all and that the clock on my phone is just 5 minutes fast. 

         The lecture was just a general run-through of what we were going to do during the semester, what was expected of us and (best of all) the opportunities we'd have before and after we'd finished our degrees. As an avid traveler, anything to do with a trip overseas, be it casual work, a holiday, school or downright labour, and I immediately sit up straight like a kid in first grade and pull all my attention  to whoever is doing the talking. 

         Overall, not too much to report on the lecture numero uno front, as it was mainly just a 'Welcome to Journalism!' speech drawn out over 50 minutes. Cool and fun, but not particularly informative on the latest word in Journalism. That, my new friends, was saved for lecture dos. 

         Lecture 2

         The following week, the buses were thankfully running on time. In fact, counting on the buses to be somewhat late, I left the house early and managed to arrive at our newly allocated lecture theatre 15 minutes early. Cue: awkward dawdling.

         After being herded into the auditorium, we were treated with a surprisingly interesting lecture on Web Iterations, News under Web 3.0 and the Challenges of Web News. Here are the main points that I picked up  from this lecture:

1. The internet (or the 'Web', as more technology-savvy people tend to call it) has so far gone through 3 stages in its surprisingly short lifetime. The first, 'Web 1.0', focused on advertising and broadcasting information. The second, 'Web 2.0', is the reason most teenagers are glued to their computer screens the minute they arrive home. Focusing on social groups, this period of the web was when we saw big-shot social sites such as Facebook, Skype and YouTube pop up. And last but not least, we have the latest stage of the internet, which is very originally known as 'Web 3.0'. This one shows how far the internet has come since its invention, as it focuses on us as individuals. It introduced Meta Tags to the world which, for those who don't know, is a special HTML tag which can tell you almost everything about any webpage (most importantly, about the content of the site). Because of computers and every other 'smart' object, your internet browser now knows where you are, what you like to do, and pretty much everything about you. And now, thanks to these Mega Tags, all the ads you see while browsing the internet will be directed at you and only you.
2. How is this relevant to Journalism, you may ask? Why, it's simple! Online newspapers are now also using this method, which means that it knows what you like to know about, what you want to read and what you don't want to read. Pretty cool, right? The only problem with this, and I'd have to say that it's a pretty big one, is the ignorance gained from seeing and reading only what we want to. How would we know about the latest Rudd-Gillard leadership battle if all we read about was the latest Broncos match or what Angelina Jolie wore to the Oscars?
3. Entitlement was the last thing we learnt about at our second lecture. As an example, we were each given a small packet of Jelly Bellies. After allowing us to sample our free snacks, we were told that if we wanted the rest, we had to pay. If not, we had to give it back. Now, if you're like me and you don't particularly enjoy Jelly Beans, this may not seem that big of a deal to you. But even I, who has no interest in sweets, felt a small sense of outrage over these being taken off us. They were given to us, so we are entitled to them. Isn't that right? This self-entitlement has become a big issue for online newspapers, who are all slowly starting to go behind Pay Walls. Many newspapers all around the world have decided that if you want to read their news, you must pay a fee. After the appearance of Ebay, classifieds (which was the main source of income for newspapers worldwide) no longer have any use. And if income was low, how would journalists be paid? Pay Walls seem to be the only option. But with only 14% of the population willing to pay for online news, these walls also come at a great risk: losing a great portion of their readers.

The lecture, overall, was completely fascinating. Coming into this degree, I didn't think I would enjoy these talks about actual Journalism and the business side of it all, but as it turns out, JOUR1111 is quickly becoming my favourite subject. And now, if you don't mind, I'm going to delete my Google history so that my laptop/future robot doesn't know everything about me.

Adios, amigos!

P.S. sorry about the length of my first post, just think of it as my first three posts all rolled into one, okay?