Student Zone

March 6
The last six minutes…

CNN editors deposit the vast amount of news briefs coming across their desks into a running log of stories called “The Wire“. All the top-story abstracts generated by CNN’s array of journalists, media analysts, foreign and domestic correspondents, editors and g-men eventually come by the wire to contribute to a running log of eclectic story reports. The nature of the stories is to display the facts and the angle. Its a near real-time display of the facts that headline CNN’s stories.
The most recent headlines detail the daily events of the Zacarias Moussaoui trial, an interesting piece relating to the Iraq war, the report of an Israeli air strike, and the South Dakota abortion ban… The reason I find this kind of format really useful is that the details are compact. The facts reported by the abstracts here supply larger stories with deeper interests. Reading “The Wire” can put the day into a broader perspective.

At rinf.com the radical stories get the most play and the facts are presented to accommodate the most radical views… sometimes the reporting goes so far left it ends up right… for instance the same story CNN reported on “The Wire” is seen on rinf.com with the scope of possible FBI blundering attached as a general interest to rinf’s readers. By the way RINF stands for “Revolutionary Information Network” with the N spelled backwards for reality-check’s sake, though not for the sake of fact checking. It is determinately biased and caters to the cultural minority, paranoids, amateur urologists, pot-heads, and conspiracy theorists. Their news articles reflect their pro sensation audience, and quick manifesto-like rants such as The Neocon Puppet Theater of History or Eyes ZOTTED Shut in America run alongside the stories that could be considered legitimate news… the Mouassaoui trial begins “Snipers climbed the roofs and police closed the streets around a suburban courthouse in Virginia today…”. That’s unabashed reporting, sensationally unabashed. The stories are good though, a lot of the extra information, in the trial coverage for instance, is substantiated, unfortunately you have to force yourself away from rinf’s unsubstantiated gossip to the legitimate news as a safety net. “Don’t believe anything that you read.”

Channel 2 CBS News at 5 headlines include a bank robbery ending in the arrest of two bank robbers by the use of a taser gun, the criminal background reports of area ice-cream truck drivers, and the recall of pottery barn cribs. The hard facts proposed by local news anchors are, in effect… taser guns are apparently useful for catching criminals instead of killing them (surprising), ice-cream truck drivers can be scary too (watch your kids… you watch them), and the one monster Stephen King has not yet overused… a mail-order yuppie baby-killer. Local news (in Chicago especially the weather) is designed to horrify and blunt the human psyche while providing the least amount of information needed for survival. Joking aside, why does fluff so abound (it is snowing in March) in local network affiliate news? Who are these people? Why am I watching this? Is this real news? In the last six minutes of the broadcast I counted 23 utterances of the word “okay”…
Is it. Is it okay?

The first news outlet which I chose for my observation was the local broadcast for ABC and is from 3/1/06. The story that I particularly listened to closely was the coverage of the newly released president Bush video, in which he was made fully aware of the danger and seriousness of Hurricane Katrina and the catastrophic effects it would have on the Southern region of the country. The video includes FEMA experts warning Bush that he had better have support for the area should New Orleans find itself in a state of emergency. Bush goes on to reassure the committee that all precautions have been taken to help the area should they need it.
This story appeared first on the broadcast by ABC, demonstrating that they found this newly revealed information to be the most important news to give its audience. While the reporters and anchors presented the story, they remained sturdy as not to reveal any personal opinions about the president or his lack of actions following the drastic state New Orleans was in. In a piece of news where so many citizens would display their disgust for the governments lack of action, the members of the news organization displayed the utmost professionalism by reporting the story, then quickly moving onto the next piece of news.
The second news outlet came in an online publication from the Canadian Broadcasting Company or CBC on 3/6/06. On their headline was the story of the growing bird-flu pandemic that has scared the world and has the acclaimed title “bigger problem than AIDS”, according to the World Health Organization. The story goes on to cover the various European and Asian countries where both animals and humans have tested positive for contracting the new out-breaking disease.
The relevance of this story is very important and should be on CBC’s main page due to the fact that this disease poses a major threat to the health of people internationally, and citizens should be made aware of the seriousness and danger of this new health threat. If CBC is to cover this story adequately, they need to keep updates and follow-ups on this growing story, as it will more than likely become a bigger problem as time goes on. The lead was well developed and included all pertinent information and made good use of the inverted pyramid structure that has been studied in class.
The third news outlet I went through was the local publication of News-Star from 3/1/06. The paper’s readers include North-side Chicago neighborhoods and serves as a voice for these communities. The story was written by one of our speakers, Angela Caputo, and covers the developing story of housing and restoration projects in the north-side. The story explains that despite investments by several citizens into rehabilitating an apartment building, the developer never used this money to pay for anything involving the property. Instead, the developer let utility bills accumulate and never spent any of the payments for redeveloping the property.
This story is important to the communities of the north side as it warns them about the hidden dangers of redeveloping north side neighborhoods as it has become a booming market in the last few years. Citizens are being informed that their money could be used for things that they are not intending, hopefully creating awareness among community members and those wishing to invest their money. The article was well-written; Caputo makes good use of her leads and knows how to tell a story through her piece of news. Although the piece wasn’t all that captivating and the news quality does not make itself apparent until well into the story, it does speak to its intended readers.

I chose to follow one of my favorite Op/Ed columnists, David Brooks, of the NY Times.

The first article dates back to 2/19/06. “Questions of Culture” tries to answer the question: Why is it that the more we advance as a species, the more backward we seem to become? He argues that better education and advances in communications technology, etc. have not made people on average more enlightened and liberal-minded. In fact, the opposite is true...Knowledge creates backlash. There is all this info out there and all we want to do is roll back the clock and escape to a more idyllic time. This piece falls more into the category of social criticism than actual news.

David Brooks, like most of the Times Op/Ed staff, is a rational, informed observer. What you get here is analysis, but its usually reasoned analysis. This is not Fox. Good Op/Ed writers like Brooks are not merely spouting personal opinions. They are also attempting to understand the news and its affects on the culture. Of course, Brooks is a moderate conservative, so his stories do tend to reflect his politics at times. Obviously, no one should read Op/Ed stuff as hard news; rather it should serve to widen one’s scope. After all, reality is what you think it is and what everybody else thinks it is.

The second article is from 2/23/06. “Kicking Arabs in the Teeth” deals with the Ports controversy. Brooks’ angle is that this entire hullabaloo is nothing more than xenophobia and a fear of globalization on the part of the public and pandering on the part of the politicians.
This view is a bit one-sided. Brooks fails to mention the fact that the Bush administration has spent the last five years scaring the hell out of people with color-coded alerts and talk of terror and freedom haters. How can anyone expect the public to react in a less paranoid fashion? The overall tone of the piece is combative, which does not serve truth or journalism in any way. Some of what he says makes sense, but overall, the argument is slanted and Brooks comes off smug and self-righteous.

The final article is from 2/26/06. “Keeping the Faith in Democracy” finds David Brooks visiting Qatar. This is a narrative about a conference of reporters, US military and leading Muslim moderates.

Brooks tells the story in the first-person, which serves to pull the reader in right away. There is less personal opinion in this one than in the second. Brooks uses a modified pyramid style. He makes more use of quotes. This particular story blends the form of the news piece with that of the Op/Ed. Overall very engaging.

Again, you have to read opinion pieces with a critical eye. For me, the important thing is to get as complete a picture of the issues as possible. This includes reading op/ed from reputable sources. As far as that goes, the New York Times is as reputable as it gets. The scope of the paper is global, and it succeeds in being the most widely read American newspaper in the world. A good combination of news and opinion is better than one or the other in my book.

First 6 minutes of February 27, Channel 7 local nightly news at 9:30pm.

There was a brief rundown of the recent prison inmate escape investigation. After only a few seconds, the next story began. “Tonight’s Scandal” was the heading. The story was about military gay sex videos. There wasn’t much more than this announcement. Then, we jump to the abortion ban in South Dakota, again only for about 20 seconds, no story, just headlines. The following story was about the recall of Pepsi cans that had a “strong chemical odor when opened.” The final jump before the commercial break was to a reporter in Torino for the Olympics. It conveyed excitement but there was no news.

My impression of this 6 minute intro was of a quickly slapped together mess of ideas with almost no reporting. “Tonight’s Scandal” borders on the despicable, as if that’s what we should be most concerned with. Gay military sex…hmmm…well I guess if that’s what Channel 7 is in to and all. These trained stooges can keep straight face while slogging through this crap. Scrap ambitions of integrity and the sky’s the limit.

First 6 minutes of February 27, Fox nightly news at 9:00pm.

The top story was an investigation of cigarette smuggling and sales on the south and west sides. They followed salespeople standing on corners and asked questions but received no answers. They explained that this was a “big business as [cigarette] taxes rise.” They apparently get the smokes from Indian reservations in New York state. The next piece was on the ban on cigarette smoking in Elk Grove Village that is being considered. They interviewed a few people including several smokers who said they would go elsewhere to smoke. Next, a triple stabbing. The killer was deemed “not random.” There was no explanation for this. Next, “rapist murderer recommended for death.” We move quickly on to the dismissed juror from the George Ryan trial. The judge imposed a gag order because this information was leaked without authorization.

Lots of typical Fox hype and more scare than substance. The "investigative" report was just some jagoff from fox chasing around a black man with a fist full of Kool's. Damn, that's hardcore. Compared to Channel 7, this was more like a Hollywood movie trailer than real news. Lots of pretty colors actually made me want to vomit. So did the immovable hair styles and dorky pseudo-seriousness portrayed by the newscasters. I found myself saying over and over, “So what?!!!???” There was no answer to my desperate cries for relevance. Ok, the dismissed juror was something. Fox news sucks donkey balls, eye balls, that is.

First 6 minutes of March 2, NBC Today at 9:00am.

There was about a minute of chuckling and random comments about how nice each of the hosts look today. The first bit was about sick kids, covered in about 10 words. Vague. 1.Suicide bomber in Pakistan who Bush called “Terrorists.” 2. 20 seconds on a “Winter Storm.” 3. Al Roecker (sp?) telling a woman outside “weathermen are sexy.” A few more seconds of yucking it up with woman. 4. National, then local weather. 5. 100 year old birthdays from “Smuckers” 6. Teens not getting enough sleep because they work so hard in school.

The clowning seems to be targeting bored housewives. They are annoying and (fill in the blank with something nastier and R rated). I was happy to see national news at the top and not local death, mayhem and illegal cigarette sales. Very rapid-fire and no depth. I found zero relevance for the piece on teens not getting enough sleep. When did this become a problem. They presented it like it was something new. It seemed we were supposed to feel bas for all these hard-working suburban teens. Blow me.

Each of the 6 minute segments packed a lot in but there was limited depth to the stories and, more importantly, there was little of relevance to me. Fox was more show than Channel 7 but they both lacked topics I cared about. Channel 5 Today was only a little better in terms of content in that there was some national news up front that seemed to matter to someone out there, at least, but the show seemed to be geared toward housewives, with references to sexy husbands and sleepy middle class teens. The clowning and back scratching between the hosts of the show was nauseating. All 3 were more or less shitty, content-wise, but slickly done nonetheless. If you like pretty lights, rock-hard hairdo’s and corny attempts at cuteness, then watch these programs.

Kristen Krolicki

Over the weekend I followed the writings of Dan Rozek, a Staff Reporter for the Chicago Sun-Times. I have come accustomed to skimming over the Sun-Times’ articles, and thought it beneficial to follow one of the papers leading reporters.

Friday, February 24, 2006

Man pleads guilty in DUI crash that killed 2

This first article was short, with only six paragraphs explaining the incident. Rozek’s lead states that on Thursday, a man from Glendale Heights (J. Refugio Blancas) admitted that while driving drunk, he blew a red light and killed a one hundred year old lady and her sixty-three year daughter back in July. Rozek then goes into the nut of the story, reporting on the W’s related to journalism: The incident took place in Elk Grove Village and the accuser is pleading guilty to reckless homicide. With an alcohol level at .29 after the accident, Blancas faces up to twenty eight years in prison. Interviews and quotes by friends and family members of the deceased women followed the nut of the story, and then Rozek finishes by describing a brief history of their life. There were no quotes from the killer or his attorneys.

In Elements of Journalism, I learned that readers are drawn to stories that are related to their communities. I was personally drawn to the story when I learned that the incident took place in my home town of Elk Grove Village. Having lost close friends and many community members in car accidents due to drunk drivers, I would have liked it if Rozek could have indicated what the town is going to do to prevent more drunk driving crashes. I thought there could have been more interviews from patrons or even the Mayor of the town.

Sunday, February 26, 2006

Activists demand cardinal resign over response to abuse allegations

Rozek’s first two words of the lead begins with, “Angry activists.” Starting off with those two words made we want to find out why the activists are angry. Comes to find out, they want Cardinal Francis George to resign because they feel as if the cardinal didn’t investigate child sex abuse allegations against Rev. Daniel McCormack and other priests aggressively enough. Barbara Blaine, president of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, starts off the second paragraph with an angry quote against the cardinal. Rozek builds tension in his following paragraphs on the cardinal’s failure to protect innocent children.

I have come to learn that when reading an article, the eye can determine when a quote is coming up, and this makes the reader more excited to read on. Throughout this article, Rozek threw in many powerful quotes that made the reading more intense and interesting to read. At one point, it seemed as if there was a war of words between the activist, Barbara Blaine and the spokesman of the archdiocese, Jim Dwyer. Being raised Catholic, I would dislike seeing a cardinal be resigned, but this article made it clear that the cardinal has taken lack of action in protecting kids.

Monday, February 27, 2006

Acquitted pal may help man in gang rape trial

The lead tells the tale of a Burr Ridge guy (Missbrenner), who is being accused of a gang rape of a sixteen year old girl. In the third paragraph, it indicates that the incident accrued four years ago and the tape was just released to jurors. The nut of the story explains who else was involved in the rape and how a semiconscious girl was taken advantage of. The ending of the story indicates what Missbrenner’s feelings are towards having a fair trial.

This is the longest out of all three articles. In a way, I found all the information to be somewhat rhetorical, because it is nothing new from what is being broadcasted on the news or written about in other newspapers. Run on sentences take up whole paragraphs, and the only quotes worth reading are stated by the accused rapist’s mother, who only speaks of sympathy for her son. I believe that Rozek should have gotten quotes form other sources and not just a few from Missbrenner’s attorneys and his mother. I would have liked to have heard what the girl’s attorneys had to say before I heard his attorney.

My Conclusion

I know I’m not an expert journalist, but I felt that Dan Rozek’s articles lacked character and weren’t intriguing to read. There were no journalistic metaphors or outstanding quotes. I would say that his leads were his best traits, but even two out of the three were weak. I was more impressed with Angela Caputo’s stories than I was of Dan Rozek’s.

I seem to have done my journal a little differently than discussed in class; rather than watch different newscasts and discern the differences between them, I decided to compare three online news sources (New York Times, CNN, and DrudgeReport) and what they each supplied to readers/citizens. This was done for practical reasons (primarily lack of time/television) so hopefully, I haven't done anything wrong.

New York Times Online:

Upon visiting the New York Times online site, one gets an immediate sense of what is important in the day's news. The major headlines of the day are presented with an informative blurb detailing part of the story, much like a lead. In my opinion, this helped train my eye to determine each story's importance. In addition to the blurb, the headlines were arranged to seem as if they were the front page of the paper itself; there were no frivolous entertainment stories or features on the page. Each of the headlines had an obvious hard news edge to them; when I had visited the page, the headlines that were featured were: "Hussein Admits Ordering '82 Arrests," "Bush Makes Surprise Visit to Afghanistan on Way to India," "Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Texas Redistricting Case," and "Senate Approves Curbs on Some Patriot Act Powers."

The story I clicked was the headline on Saddam Hussein. The story was very much straight from the paper; it was informative and well researched, in the style that the New York Times has come to be known for. The story was in an inverted pyramid format, with a standard lead and nut graph. Overall, it answered all of the questions a reader would ask, but left room for a follow-up or later development in a future story.

CNN Online:

The layout of CNN Online is very different from the NYT. The page has no immediate headline to grasp one's attention. Each of the links on the page are varying topics, ranging from national news to entertainment to political news. Each of the links on the page are all of seemingly equal importance; it's up to the reader to determine what they want to read or what is important to them. There were numerous headlines to pick from, so listing them here would be inane.

I clicked on a link that directed me to a story, also about Saddam Hussein and his trial. This story, unlike the NYT, lacked a lot of vital information. It was much shorter than the NYT story; they were fairly different stories (the NYT focused on the claims made against Hussein, while CNN reported Husseins comments related to the U.S.), but the reporting done for the NYT was much more thorough than CNN. It seemed, upon reading the article, that the writing was very much a TV type story; the reporting was shallow when it involved details, but it got the major points across.

DrudgeReport:

DrudgeReport is an online news source that is not run by any one particular company. The site is very haphazard; there are links everywhere, and they are fairly organized. Similar headlines are grouped together, while unrelated headlines are everywhere else. The headline/link positions are similar to CNN in that the only way to distinguish important or breaking news is that those links will be highlighted in red, or will be featured at the top of page. This makes it very confusing to distinguish what story is of more importance. A nice feature, however, is the bottom of the page which posts links to particular columnists, other news sources, as well as international news organizations.

For the most part, DrudgeReport does not do its own reporting. Each of the links on the page redirect you to other sites that have already reported on the story. For example, in continuing with covering the Hussein headlines, DrudgeReport redirected me to the same CNN story I had previously discussed. This is somewhat dissappointing; if you want to get similar stories from other sources, you run the risk of seeing the same story on DrudgeReport.

Summary:

Of the three sources I reviewed, the NYT was the most thorough and had the best reporting. The page was easy to navigate, and the story itself was strictly hard news reporting. The NYT offered the normal "frivolous" stories too (entertainment, sports, features) but they were separate sections of their own. CNN was much like a news show; quick stories that informed the basic information and rarely delved deeper than that. DrudgeReport was by far the most dissappointing, since no original reporting was done.

2/23/06 WLS 7 ABC 7 News at 6pm
This was my first time watching this news broadcast. They focused on both local and international news. They started off with an update on the current trial involving Lura Lynn’s Husband. She had given her first interview in regards to her husband’s trial. Financial Aid is going to be pulled out from district 401 for turning down a student who was an illegal alian based upon the rules they had in place. They also covered a car crash in which the terror squad was called in. The one of the men involved in the crash was an Albanian who was found to have large sums of money in it. There was a dual kidney transplant here at Chicago Hospital when two wives donated kidneys to the other woman’s husband. After this came the smaller news stories with barely any reporting, mainly just announcing information.
In response to the journalism aspect of the news, I think they did a decent job getting the information across without dressing it up. They always included quotes and clips when covering an individual. When they covered the issue about the student being turned down, they interviewed with an administrator from the school, a student from the school, a teacher from the school. They did not, however, interview with the student who had been turned down. I would have been interested to hear what they were doing in response to this and also what they thought about the legal aspect. Throughout the broadcast they used very good leads – they were short and concise. I didn’t count, but I’d guess none of them were over 25 words long.

2/28/06 WLS 7 News at 6pm
Today’s newscast opened with a storyof an alleged double murder. The suspect was charged with stabbing and killing his mother, then ordering and stabbing to death an escort. Next was a story about the tribute to a dead Black Panther member. The man also helped to clothe, feed, and shelter the homeless. This is why people in the streets choose to honor him. Also, the terror plot charges that were thought to be centered in Ohio turned out to be linked to a terror group here in Chicago. This news program also covered the closing of Chicago’s oldest restaurant; Berghoff’s.
You could tell there was a lot of reporting behind the story of the alleged double murder. There was some on the scenes reporting as well as investigative. Specific times, dates, and evidence were given during the report. They also followed up after the stabbings and told about the where abouts and current condition of the alleged murderer. Precise language was used to report that this allegedly took place, showing that the guilt of the person is not yet proven. The names of the local people were held until later in the story because they were just local people, keeping the lead understandable and basic. When covering the tribute to a former Black Panther, quotes were used very effectively when they quoted the deceased man as saying: “kill the pigs”. Because this is such a bold statement it was much more effective to actually quote than to try to paraphrase. Whenever quotes were used without a visual clip, the quotes were always designated to a specific person.

3/1/06 WLS 7 News at 6pm
Today’s broadcast started off covering a court case of rape. They introduced the people involved (from the suburbs) and also gave details of how the court case was coming along. Next they announced a controversy involving commercials using phony headlines on real papers to promote governor election. There were also two follow-up stories from my first viewing of this news program. The terror ring was further investigated, and more information was given as to how the ring operated and who turned the terrorists in. The double kidney swap patients were visited and interviewed again to report that all four people are doing well and leaving Chicago Hospital today. Today also marked the six month anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. Downtown there was a vigil held in honor of the victims and to help promote awareness and push the government to bump up relief and recovery.
It was good to see that they did the follow-up stories. As time goes on more information has been uncovered and the stories they cover develop more. Doing follow-ups shows that they are conserned with more than breaking news stories, they are trying to get the truth and actual stories to the public. When they covered the rape charges, the reporter was on the scene and gave information not only of what went down in the courtroom, but also how the defendant and plaintiff acted; such as their physical actions and mannerisms. This is very detailed reporting and shows they really dig in to their stories. At the end of the news report, a news flash of a current two car crash was given with basic information about who, what , when, where, and why. This shows that they try to get up to the minute news to their viewers as well as detailed reports.

Overall, I was very happy with the reporting done on this news station. When applicable, they always covered both sides of the story. The leads and writing styles they used were very effective and sometimes used a spin on words to catch the viewer’s attention. The five W’s where always answered and well as how. I was pleased to see that all the reporting done on this station was neutral, you didn’t really get the feeling that the reporters opinions and feelings had anything to do with how the stories were covered.