JOUR 1111 Lecture 12: What's in it For Me?

In our last lecture, we listened to guest speaker Steve Mulkington (I am certain I have mis-spelt his name... sorry), one of Australia's most popular entertainment 'bloggers'. Not only did he tell us about his own experiences in the business, but also the various opportunities we have as young journalists

He stressed that we have more ways of expressing ourselves then ever before. Obviously the internet is a main one - Facebook, twitter, blogging, all of these outlets for discussion, if you like, give everyone a chance to say what they think.

For people like us, trying to get jobs out of what we think, Steve said that we need to focus on the 'how'.

The following are a couple of things that Steve said that resonated with me:

"You all have opinions on stuff, it just about HOW you communicate that core message."

"The way we understand how our information is presented to us, whether it's ratings, whether it's what's communicated to us through news... it's going to impact on the type of writers and journalists we become." 

This whole journalism course has been a blast. I have learnt skills that I honestly think will stick with me for the rest of my life, irrespective of whether I end up working as a journalist or not.

JOUR 1111 Lecture 11: Investigative Journalism

This week we looked at investigative journalism - its purpose in the media, and how it is under threat from online news.

Many of the explored ideas in relation to investigative journalism were things that I had discussed in earlier blog posts. The main point that I believe, and one that was reinforced in the lecture, was that ALL journalism should be investigative.

The slide above illustrates the main reason why well-researched journalism is becoming more difficult to find. The accessibility of the web has diluted the quality of journalism. 

Whilst this slide is saying there are less journalists, I am of the belief that there are more so-called 'journalists', then ever before. The web is open to anyone.  This means that ANYONE can be a journalist. Anyone can write about an event and how they saw it, without verifying facts. Facebook and blogging are forums that are typically used for lazy journalism. 

I feel that with the evolution of the internet and different media forums, we are more prone to bad journalism.

People might disagree with me, arguing that just because the average Joe wrote a story on something, doesn't make him a journalist. Well, yes it does. It just doesn't make him a very good one. 

We need to return to a more investigative process in journalism, for the benefit of everyone. 

JOUR 1111: Lecture 10: Agenda Setting

This week we explored the significance of agenda setting in the media.

Whilst it is a pretty basic concept, it made me think of the power of the media agenda. Agenda setting is a very influential tool of the media. An agenda tells the public what is important, as it shapes public awareness and thought on particular issues.

There have been many instances where the media's agenda have diverted the public's attention from a particular issue. As it explains on the slide below, propaganda is a form of agenda setting.

You only need at major political movements or conflicts, to see how a media agenda can influence  population. An example would be the Nazi regime, where Hilter delivered a particular message to shape people's perceptions of Jewish people. 

Whilst this is an extreme example, it shows the power and influence of a media agenda.

JOUR 1111 Lecture 9: News Values

Our ninth lecture saw us looking at news values.

 

Are news values absolute?

It was interesting looking at the four main criteria when defining the value of particular news. What we see in theory, are four points that balance out to make news values. However, in my opinion, you regularly see imbalances emerging in relation to particular stories. For example, stories are often blown out of proportion in order to give it more impact and therefore uplift its value.

The main point that I took away from the lecture was that news values are based on a journalists' instinct - what he/she believes a story to be worth. There is no scientific formula that is associated with defining news values.

I imagine that a journalist's judgement could be influenced by a couple of things. The financial benefit associated with a story could lead to the popular news taking priority. Perhaps this is why many feel that current news values are so obscured.