Thursday, June 2, 2016

Final Blog

         I found this article on a situation involving a 17 year old gorilla (Harambe) and a 4 year old boy who fell into the enclosure. The gorilla ended up being shot and killed, causing a great uproar throughout the internet over the fact of whether or not this was necessary. Many people are against the killing of the gorilla and claim it was unjust, but the author does a good point of showing how he believes they made the right call. He focuses on both sides of the issue, and helps prove why he thinks he is correct. I think that the zoo had every right to kill the gorilla, the situation was to dangerous and unpredictable and ultimately it came down to human or animal life. And say they didn't end up shooting it right away, the gorilla could have harmed or killed the child which would have then in turn end in the gorillas death as well.
          Another issue of conflict is whether or not the parents of the child did a good job watching the kid, and whether or not the parent should be held accountable for the death. I think this would be a reasonable thing to do, and something the authors highlights as the mother was very neglecting of her child to allow him to climb in. He had even told her that he wanted to go in so she definitely shouldn't have taken her eyes off him. Social media and the news has played a huge part in this, glorifying this gorilla and adding to the drama over the incident. Stories like this get spread like wildfire, and get much more concern than other serious issues. For instance many people were shot in Chicago this memorial day weekend, but this is far less publicly known than one gorilla getting shot. Why do instances like the gorilla get so much more attention and sympathy than ones of serious threat?

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Who owns reality?

          News has become very easy to receive, you can even chose and limit what type of news you are open to receiving. This can be very dangerous I think because views and opinions can be very one sided then. If someone only gets news from a democratic standpoint, their views will be democratic, and the choices they make will be based off of those points when the information might be biased. Many news agencies are biased towards a certain party, and try to gain support and cover things that reflect on the parties views. I think this is dangerous because it misinforms people. Even though the people have a choice of what to watch, they usually go back to something that they are comfortable with or what is easiest, or what is most common in their community.
          If someone is of higher income, then they will have more access to news, but with the digital age people have a lower access to a lot of news if they have a lower income. Poor communities are typically less educated on the news and what is going on in the world because they are most interested in things that are going on in their own community, and then this is also what they can afford. Smaller and lower in come cities find news more interesting if they have a personal connection with it, and they feel more involved with news that is closer to home for them. So people who live in these areas don't have a lot of information on world problems and issues as much as ones close to home, this can also be dangerous.
          Digital age and the media is a big thing, and the diversity involved with digital media is something that will be a problem that will hold it down in the future. The diversity of the type of news should be improved on some channels, but then again with many news channels they might get more of an outlook with many channels.

Thursday, May 5, 2016

Fake news

          I think that as the way we get news changes, the way that news is presented must also change. The public is losing their attention span, and the news to be presented in a easier way that connects to the times more. Satire news is something that is becoming a lot more popular because people feel like they can relate to it. Places like the onion get a lot more traffic than newspapers because they are a lot more entertaining even if they don't give actual news. The way these stories are presented is easy to understand, and people can relate to them. They often share inside bias or aren't as politically correct as newspapers.
          Satire is one of the most effect ways to get a message across, and it is by far my favorite. Satire can be tricky, and very few people can do satire correctly but if they manage to the reward is great. Satire is a good way to get a point across, or an opinion. Satire is not a g good way to tell a story but it is very useful for getting your views across. Satire news can be dangerous but it gets people talking about certain subjects, and this is important. Click hole  does a good job of making people think. Someone may see a certain story and laugh and just blow it off, but later they could be thinking about it and then the topic all together. It discretely bring issues forward in a way that is relate able, funny and easy to comprehend.
          I think that news will be the most successful in this time if it is "dumb down". People are not interested in the news and how it is presented so something must change. People want to feel more connected to not only the news but each other and luckily this is very easy with social media. For people to truly learn to appreciate the news again the news needs to come to them in more appealing ways, I think that satire and news with a little comedic value does a great job of this and is something that will be essential in the future. If something is funny, people are more drawn to it and will be more likely to read the news and share it with their friends thus getting the news more attention.
          The news needs to be more approachable to people, and brought to them in a way that they will understand and enjoy.

Thursday, April 14, 2016

What does your news say about you?

          You can tell a lot of things about a person based on where they get their news. For example if they get it from the Guardian you can concur that they are very masculine. But if they get it from TMZ or cosmopolitan they may be on the drama queen side. As hard as we may try, everyone is exposed to some sort of news during the day whether it comes from Instagram or the New York Times. The type of news a person is exposed to says something about that person, because news can be biased, selective or just plain irrelevant.
          People are nosy. We like to know about what's going on even if it has no relevance to us, and this can be harmful or helpful. If someone follows the news closely, then they have a greater knowledge of what is going on in the world and this may help them make more educated choices in their life. If someone knows about what is going on outside their bubble then they will be more aware of things, but this can be bad by causing panic. For instance if someone hears of a terrorist attack in Egypt, they may become more cautious of people in their communities and maybe even paranoid. Ignorance can be bliss. But then there is the news on the other end of the spectrum, the local and gossip news. This can be useful and will affect people in their everyday lies. But Gossip can destroy a person reputation whether they are involved or just reading it.
           Certain news sources can be, and often are filled with tragic stories, but is the world really as tragic as perceived? The news seems to mainly focus on negative things, and this may be for multiple reasons. It could be the fact that the journalist are hoping to make people realize that bad things do happen, and that we need to do something about it. But maybe the reason is us, do people want to read sad news? If you were to ask a group of people I doubt that they would say they prefer depressing stories over uplifting ones, but this very well could be the case. I feel that people may want sad news for many reasons. People could want to read sad news because it is just such a shock to them, and they need this from the boring lives they have. In some instances the news is something they never thought could happen, and seeing that it did gives them something to talk about and band together on. Another possible reason is that we like to read these things to feel better about yourself. Gas prices might be bad in good old USA, but at least we don't have to send our children off to war. 
          Where a person gets their news says a lot about them, and how they are biased. I believe that everyone is biased in some way. And their news has a big impact on it.

Sunday, April 10, 2016

'Back in the water" A story by Stephen Clark

"I wasn't on a good path in my teen years, I got kicked out of school when I was 16 and wasn't headed anywhere after that so I decided to join the Navy to straighten me out. I didn't know how to swim, now many people ask why I would join the navy if then but I knew I would learn, and I did"
           "So I arrive at the Grey Lakes boot camp, and its 26 degrees below zero! The first thing they do then is shave my head and give me clothes that don't fit!" he chuckles. " Then finally on the third week they march us all down to the pool and sort us into three groups, the ones who can swim, the ones who can flounder and then my group, the ones who don't know anything. The first task they give us is floating, they march us down to the deep end and then march us right up to the diving board and push us in 16 foot freezing water! They told us to sink to the bottom, and then relax and float up to the top, as long as you stay calm you'd be fine. But this was hard for someone who didn't know how to swim, so there was grown men floundering and crying in the water and as soon as they managed to get over to the side the men with poles would push them back in! And they would still try and cling to the side while being pushed back. I managed to stay calm and float, and eventually I was swimming" 
          "I'm sure I have bored you to death with my story, but if you ever need another one I can tell you about the time I accidentally ate some horse"

Thursday, March 24, 2016


          Choice is something everyone wants, and everyone thinks that they have it but do they really? People are losing their ability to choose, but they think that they have more and more options and in reality they are losing the ability themselves to chose, people think that they want choice and they enjoy choosing but only from a few select things. People want to have freedom and choice, but they want their choices to be planned out for them. 
          On social media and the news, people have the option to chose but after a while the news and social media chose for them, and chose what you do according to your "best" interest. After they see a little bit of your choices, they start to choose for you and slowly alter your choices. For instance if they share what you see and you're embarrassed about it, or if it shows you that successful people are choosing to look or read something else then you may be inclined to change what you choose. They can control what you chose and look at, and most people don't want to be different. 
          Another thing with choice is that when people do chose what they want, they chose things that they can relate with and make them feel good about themselves. Someone is much more likely to read some celebrity gossip and be happy about that than hearing about terrorist attacks. They want to feel like they aren't in danger and that everything is fine, so journalism has to change to accommodate this. And journalist have the choice to make a good story and a bad one, and the "good" stories are the ones that people don't really need to hear. So the choices are limited, and the people are losing the ability to chose. People are losing the ability to chose, or at least make good choices. So the government has to put out things that aren't as important because this is what will be most successful for them, Everything is easy to access, and information is spoon fed to people because they are losing the attention span for good news. They want things that include them directly and they like to feel like they have an impact with what they digest. 
          When people make bad decisions about the news, it is not the news fault for putting bad news out there. This is what the people want so this is what has to be said. People are losing the interest for good news. I think that people should not be trusted with the ability to chose because we no longer make bad choices so the journalist and online news is taking away our ability to chose. Instead of giving us better choices, they are jut making the bad choices for us. I think that they need to give us good choices, but still be able to chose.

Sunday, March 13, 2016

The future of journalism

          With the world changing all the time, so is journalism and journalist must adapt to what is becoming of it. These changes can be for better or worse, but most of the changes and more importantly the way they are being used is for the worst. With all the updates in technology, newspapers are becoming more and more irrelevant and social media is taking it's place. The amount of information you can get on social media and the internet is so much greater than that of a newspaper and also much more efficient. But the way these things are being used is not benefiting journalism, with all the information available and all the good real news you can get garbage gossip is pushed to the front and plastered all over the internet making it hard to find real news. People are starting to lose what its like to hear real news, and they're losing interest in it period making gossip all the more popular and easy to find while real news gets pushed aside.
          People want gossip, but they need to hear the real news. The problem is journalist have to write something that makes a profit, because if the people don't want it then its no good. I think for the future of news, and to make real journalism come alive again we have to dumb down the news, or at least at first. People have forgotten how to read real news, and they get bored with it so we need to present it in a way that interest them. One way would be a commenting system which we included in our app WNA. If people can comment and connect with others they will feel important, and smart. And if we show that they spend a lot of time on gossip sites, another feature in our app then they might not look at them as much for the reason of not wanting to look bad and this will work as a domino effect as everyone switches over to real news. Another thing needed to bring journalism back is to limit or make the news everyday people put out less important. They should be able to comment but not put out the news themselves. There is an overload of information then that is not necessarily correct, and with Instagram and snap chat today that not quality news.
          For journalism to become good again, we need to dumb the news down and make it more appealing to the people. It needs to be more exciting and interactive for the people to connect