Tweet!

Look familiar to you?

If not, it should. Twitter.com is the latest site when it comes to news dissemination, but surprisingly it isn't run by a news organization.

It's run through you.

I first heard about twitter at an online journalism conference last spring. Considering the work I do as Managing Editor for Online at The Daily Illini and my ongoing interest in new media, I signed up for the site.

And then I didn't log in for months.

At first it seemed like a glorified Facebook update. Since I already had a Facebook profile, I wasn't too sure what to make of twitter.

That was until this past week. Many news organizations, such as The Chicago Tribune, The Chicago Sun-Times and locally The News-Gazette use twitter to connect with a wide audience. They do so by updating their status with the latest headlines about news, weather, traffic, etc.

For any student interested in the news, this is the latest place to go. It's a social networking Web site similar to Facebook that in a clean and simple format that allows you to digest your favorite outlet's articles.

Fancy yourself a news junky? Then this is your latest high.

Get involved

I didn't think this image would look so small, but here's a peak at what St. Louis Post-Dispatch is doing to generate user interest. They've created a separate Web site that they link to in many instances called mystltoday. http://my.stltoday.com/community/app/nf/vistafs.aspx

What this Web site does is it encourages community participation in journalism. It allows people to share the stories of how the news has impacted their life, tailoring it to their specific needs, wants and desires.

In my opinion the best thing about this is that it breaks down the barriers between journalists and the community they serve. Journalists can be viewed as higher players in the game of information, simply gathering and preaching news as we see hit. Yet the media outreach created through user submitted content allows readers to become part of the news, a move that could hopefully generate some revenue and more importantly, more interest in a business that according to gruesome headlines has taken a few blows.

Perhaps the end is near

Odd as it might be, the same news organization that brought you the trashy slideshow of celebrity mug shots is now heralding in a temporary end to tabloid journalism.

The Chicago Tribune's logic: celebrities are getting boring.

Apparently we're past the mayhem of Brajolina and Bennifer. May those days rest in peace.

Here's a link to that article: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-celebrity-lull-1117nov17,0,6940222.story

Typically I'm a cynic. Some consider it a negative quality, I consider it survival of the fittest. But in this case, I'd like to think that the American public has shed its fascination with celebrities. Perhaps images of war and suffering are actually getting the attention they deserve.

And right when I was thinking that, I scrolled down and saw a link to the slideshow of celeb mug shots I used as a guilty pleasure. Gotta love related content.

Wheel of Justice!

This past summer my Dad's family moved to a suburb of Houston called Katy. I decided to visit the strange, exotic land of Texas during Thanksgiving break, which meant that I had a long ride ahead of me.

Somewhere along the Louisiana bayou my Dad informed me of a type of news segment the local NBC affiliated aired. This segment consists of a man spinning a wheel that has profiles of several criminals that are still at large tacked on it. Once the wheel selects somebody, the station plays a brief biography on that person.

One example my Dad thought of was a man who had committed a string of fast food robberies along the interstate that runs through Texas and Louisiana. Any audience member who helps aid in capturing the perpetrator earns $500, and the capture is filmed and aired the following week.

How American.

Naturally this threw my Chicago-suburban self for a loop. It seemed odd that a news station would have a news segment based on old-fashioned cowboy justice. Sure it is Texas, but isn't that a twinge bit stereotypical?

My mind, however, changed while I was basking in the warm southwest sun. Many news organizations are pushing for user interaction as a way of retaining their audience. Whether it's poll questions, user submitted photos, forums or article comments, this seemed like televisions way of appealing to its audience.

After all, who could resist the "Wheel of Justice."

Here's a link to the station's Web site http://www.click2houston.com/wheelofjustice/index.html

They have a blog of justice as well. Don't mess with Texas.

Photo Response

Photo 1: Boy grieving for his dog

Why you could run the photo: The main reason I can think of for running this photo is for the emotion that it captures. It definitely tells a story, and it's one the evokes a sense of grief that connects the audience to the story being told.

Why you wouldn't want to run the photo: This was obviously an extremely sad moment for the boy involved in his family, and God willing the idiot who hit the dog would be devastated by his or her actions. To run this photograph would expose a very personal moment.

Local or not: Even if this were a local photo, the issue that I have with it is that it's invading a personal moment while having no news value. Unless the accident with the dog caused a chain reaction of accidents that lead to a house catching on fire or a law being made about dog slaying, I really don't feel that the invasion of privacy is warranted.

Placement: For the same reason I wouldn't run the photo even if it were local, I don't think the placement has any part of this photo. It's still violates the boy's privacy whether or not it's on the front page or an inside page.

Verdict: I wouldn't run the photo.

Criteria: I couldn't imagine the sadness that I would feel if my dog was killed by a car accident. If this picture was taken with my brother mourning our precious puppy Maeve, I would be furious with the news organization and their decision making process.

Photo 2: A family mourns their loss

Why you could run the photo: Similar to photo 1, this photo tells a distinct story that is packed with emotion. The loss is tragic, and the photographer was able to capture just how awful of a moment this was in the lives of the little boy's family.

Why you wouldn't want to run the photo: Also similar to photo 1. The part that bothers me the most about this photo is that you can see the boy's face in it. It would be one thing if the photographer took a picture of the family grieving, a common photo after a death occurs, but the fact that you can see the boy in it makes it so much worse.

Local or not: This photo being local would actually serve as another reason why I wouldn't want to imagine it. Imagine being in first grade with the child who died and seeing this image when your parents read the newspaper over breakfast.

Placement: Maybe the child eating breakfast wouldn't see the picture if it were inside, but chances are the family will.

Verdict: I wouldn't run the photo.

Criteria: Every time I see a picture of children who have been killed, hurt, are starving, etc. I always think about how I would feel if that child was one of my younger siblings. It's easy to brush off these things when you don't feel connected to the child, but when I think that it could be one of them it breaks my heart. I don't see how you could run this photo when a photo of the family grieving without the body in it or when a photo of the crew looking for the child could be run instead.

Photo 3: Bud Dwyer kills himself

Why you could run the photo: This photo is the news story. It's an action shot about a gruesome act. There's not any blood in it, and I wasn't able to tell from looking at the picture that he had pulled the trigger and that the bullet was most likely in his brain until I was told that.

Why you wouldn't want to run the photo: The bullet was in his brain.

Local or not: I don't think that it would matter if this was local. Even if you were covering this incident from a local news organization, the suicide was televised, making it a national story and putting the local peg on the back burner.

Placement: Still gruesome on an inside page.

Verdict: I wouldn't run it.

Criteria: If I knew and cared about him, I would feel like this photo was haunting me, even if it wasn't as gruesome as some of the other ones might be. A picture of of the chaos that I'm sure ensued after this would tell the story as well.

Photo 4: Dead printing plant worker

Why you could run the photo: It's an excellent shot when it comes to the actual composure of the photo. The way that the lines in the photo work leads your eye directly to the body, making it hard to take your eyes away from the image. It also adds to the morose feeling the photo creates.

Why you wouldn't want to run the photo: Similar to other photos, putting yourself in the place of one of the plant worker's family or friends makes the image unbearable.

Local or not: Just like the picture of the boy who drown, having this photo run in a local newspaper could actually make it worse since it's more likely to be seen by people who knew the victim.

Verdict: I wouldn't run this photo.

Criteria: The reasons for why this photo shouldn't run trump the reasons why it should.

Photo 5: The boy with a piece of fence through his face

Why you could run the photo: It definitely tells the story, and quite frankly I don't know that words could capture the meaning as well at the photo does.

Why you wouldn't want to run the photo: Two words - ew, ouch.

Local or not: Since the boy survived I don't feel like this photo would be too disturbing for his family or friends to see, other than the fact that it looks extremely painful. I'm sure his friends might actually think it's cool.

Local or not: This photo wouldn't be relevant to a non-local audience, so if it were a local photo then it most likely should run.

Placement: Perhaps the image is too disturbing to run large, or as the lead photo on the front page, but if it were either small on the front page or on an inside page then I don't think it would be as bad.

Verdict: I'd run it, gross or not.

Criteria: Reversing the roles this time doesn't have the same effect. Had the boy died, then it would be another story.

Photo 6: A woman being sexually attacked by a mob

Why you could run the photo: The photo does tell the story in a way that maybe words couldn't as well. It's horrific. Not to mention that running it would bring some justice to the offenders and hopefully make people think about how the celebration effects those around them. Also, with the face blurred her identity is protected.

Why you wouldn't want to run the photo: This was by far the most disturbing image. I couldn't image how violated I would feel if I were that woman. Quite frankly if I were the photog I don't know that I would've been able to use my camera for beating the crap out of those guys. Sexual violence is is one of the worst things that could happen to a woman, making this picture utterly heinous.

Local or not: I could see wanting to ruin the lives of the men who did this as a reason to run this photo if it were local.

Placement: Once again, imagine the breakfast table with kids there. This image would be difficult to explain to them, meaning that the front page is definitely out of the question.

Verdict: Not a chance in hell would I run this photo.

Criteria: This photo was a struggle between my sympathy for the victim and the anger I felt toward the perpetrators. I want to run the photo to stick it to those fiends, however this could be unethical as in our legal system does claim that all criminals are innocent until proven guilty, and this photo is pretty damning. However, I'd be willing to overlook that. Still, in the end my obligation is to the victim, not to the criminals. If this happened to me, the last thing in the world I would want is for this photo to run, although I would like it for evidence why I fried the asses who did this.

The trashiest slideshow I've ever seen

While once again looking at my favorite news Web site, www.chicagotribune.com, I noticed that there was a story about Heather Locklear being arrested. Since this was such a light headline compared to the other ones about police officers clinging to life after being shot and other such gruesome events, I decided to click on the link underneath Heather's headline that said "Photos."

What this link took me to might just be the trashiest, yet most fascinating, photo slideshow of my life. With just a click of my mouse I was able to look at 93, yes that's right 93, mugshots of rich and famous people.

Much to my cagrine, I looked at all of them.

I couldn't help it.

I'd like to think that I have a fairly high standard when it comes to journalism. Typically I shun magazines about celebrities, thinking that stories about whether Jennifer Aniston has emotionally healed from her latest breakup, people who are skinny, people who are fat, women who are pregnant, etc. do not constitute actually forms of journalism. I suppose there's some credit to quoting anonymous sources close to celebrities about how they're recovering from their latest DUI, I'd like to think that the majority of journalism actually educates the public in order to uphold a democratic society.

Even if you're an entertainment, food or sports writing perhaps upholding a democratic society isn't necessarily your goal, nor should it be, but at least there are standards that this trashy slideshow doesn't come anywhere near meeting.

This is garbage, which makes me ponder two different things:

1) Why would an online editor allow this to be posted
2) Why was I so fascinated with it?

To answer the first question, I'd like to think that there's some logic to posting this slideshow other than getting hits from amused audience members such as myself. So what would the reasons be?

Honestly, I can't think of any. At The Daily Illini we run mug shots when reporting on a specific story, but I can't see how this is remotely credible. How exactly does this tell the story any better than just posting Heather Locklear's photo? I suppose only the editors at The Chicago Tribune know.

As for my second question, there was something fascinating about looking at celebrities in their weakened state. I suppose that somebody in the psychology department could do a study on this. After all, we're inundated with photos and videos of celebrities, who showcase an impractical body image, on a more than regular basis. Perhaps I liked seeing them when they looked ... well, normal?

Then again, there was always the thrill of seeing who would come up next. While there were a few repeat offenders, such as Lindsay Lohan, the majority of people provided me with a fresh form of amusement. It was like a guessing game. I would see the picture and then have to identify who the celebrity was without looking at the caption.

At the very least I was amused, although I definitely wouldn't say I was anymore informed about the world.

But before you judge me, try looking at it for yourself:
Mugshots of the rich and infamous

Best Daley face ever!

I logged on to my beloved Chicago Tribune to see the best Mayor Daley face ever made. Apparently he's upset about a negative commercial by McCain's ad campaign linking his brother and Obama to Chicago's dirty politics.

It featured both the best picture I've ever seen of Daley and this amazing quote: "When you start throwing mud, mud is going to be thrown at you and it's going to be sticky."

Sweet home, Chicago.

Underneath this story there was a link to another story entitled "Daley: Cut beer sales by ballparks." Quite frankly the only thing the two stories had in common were Daley, so I'm not too sure they should've been packaged together. Too bad I was too distracted by how awesome Daley's face looked to care.

Online Corrections

The first day of lecture we discussed the need for transparency in the media. The more transparent the media is, the more credible it is. One of the ways the media can do this is by being clear about their corrections.

Unfortunately, I need to petition for a correction in one of my classmate's blogs.

A Wednesday, Sept. 17 blog post by Meghan Montemurro entitled "Michael Phelps Obsession?" inaccurately said "(This blog post is dedicated to Katie O'Connell and her love of Michael Phelps.)"

I am, in fact, not in love with Michael Phelps.

Miriam-Webster defines love as "a strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties." Considering that I have never met Michael Phelps, the statement made by the author is false.

I only ask that the media be clear in its reporting. When statements are made that are false, I ask that they be corrected.

Thank you.

A true puzzle

Online journalism, because of its lack of traditional boundaries such as word counts, can be more dynamic than more traditional forms of journalism. However, this leaves us asking how much is too much?

The New York Times has a feature on its Web site that allows readers to double click on any given word and multiple definitions from American Heritage Dictionary, Columbia Encyclopedia, Medical Dictionary, WordNet, etc. While this tool can be useful to medical terminology or looking at references that are specific to New York, I was reading an article called The Bipolar Puzzle when I accidentally double clicked on the word "earlier." Sure enough a definition popped up, informing me of the definition of a word I already knew.

So like I said, this tool could be useful in some cases, but to put links to definitions with every word could prove to be bothersome for those of us who like to highlight as we read online.

When it comes to online, how much is too much?

How hard is it to put lipstick on a pig?

One of my friends from The Daily Illini sent me this link. As she said in her e-mail, "At best this is funny. At worst, it's animal cruelty."

Who says there's not a place for video in the online newsroom, let alone politics?

Video Link: How hard is it to put lipstick on a pig?

A new spin on spin

My Father constantly urged me to put my writing ability to use by become a journalist. What's strange about this typical parental persuasion is that my Dad hates journalists with a passion, but I know for a fact he loves me.

Why does Joe O'Connell hate journalists so much? Because he thinks they're all bias.

To be honest, there are times where I can sympathize with my Father's perspective. Being a man with high political interests, although I won't say which way, Joe O'Connell has the ability to point out bias in pretty much any piece of journalism. Sometimes I think he sees journalists as Mel Gibson sees the government in "Conspiracy Theory," but then there are the times when his arguments are justified.

Luckily, Joe O'Connell might have a partner in bias-spotting. A self-proclaimed political progressive and conservative had melded minds to create spinspotter.com, a Web site geared at detecting bias both ways in a story. According to their home page, "We have tremendous respect for journalists, but who would argue that the media circus isn't out of control? A full 66% of Americans think the press is one-sided."

Obviously this is cause for alarm. An article on BusinessWeek. com said that the site uses the Society of Professional Journalist's Code of Ethics to find bias through examples of "...reporter's voice (adjectives used by a journalist that go beyond the supporting evidence in the article); passive voice (example: a story says "bombs land" without stating which party is responsible for them); a biased source (a quoted source's partisanship is not clearly identified); disregarded context (a political rally's attendance is reported to be "massive," but would it have been so huge had the surviving members of the Beatles not played?); and lack of balance (a news story on a controversial topic gives much more credence to one side's claims)."

So what does this mean for journalists? Honestly, the site is not guaranteed to work, so it could mean very little. Cynicism about the mechanics of the site aside, I think this is both bad and good for the world of journalism. It's bad that the opinion of the media has sunk to the point where people are so enraged and feel the need to track bias in reporting rather than reading a variety of sources to gain a full perspective.

However, this may be a tool that journalists can use to benefit. As evident by the remarks of a fellow student in lecture today, some journalists may have a difficult time distinguishing fact from opinion. If journalists used this Web site to examine anywhere there may be bias in their articles that they were unaware of and didn't intend to include. Journalists using this site enough may help to eliminate unintentional bias, as well as the 66 percent of Americans view us as being bias.

Article Link: Media Bias? Not if this Web site can help it.

The future of journalism?

The Chicago Tribune had an article that made me think a little bit about the future of journalism. Working in the online department of The Daily Illini has taught me that almost everybody has their opinion on what medium will emerge as the dominant force in journalism - either print, broadcast or online - yet very few people take into consideration what this means for the actual journalist beyond possible unemployment.

So what if young journalists are made into machines themselves, metaphorically speaking of course.

South Elgin High School has created BEACON, or the Broadcast Education and Communication Networks Academy. This academy takes students at the ripe age of 13 or 14 and funnels them into having a career in either "broadcast and entertainment industries, cable, online media, video and audio production and electronic communications."

Interesting. And I thought working on my high school's newspaper was enough.

On one hand I can see the benefit of such an academy. Those who graduate from there will most likely be able to land some sort of internship outside of high school, making them the envy of their college peers and easily employable after their college careers.

However, what happened to high school? I didn't even like high school but I feel like pressuring the American teenager into starting an intense, highly concentrated study of journalism at such a young age would turn them into journalism machines. Sure they'll know how to tell a story in both print, broadcast and online formats, but will they be able to tell the stories of their peers who attend a normal high school?

Perhaps part of me is still an idealist when it comes to journalism, but isn't part of our job to connect people to the emotions and experiences of others? If a 14 -year-old journalism student spends all day editing video to be posted online rather than joining another co-curricular activity or sport, how are they supposed to tell the story of the local basketball hero who tore his ACL with any type of emotion? Unless of course they teach classes in how to relate to your peers and tell their stories in an emotional manner.

There's just something a little too strange about putting somebody who has barely hit puberty into a high school that programs them for a career they'll have in about 8 years. Heaven forbid they change their minds about their majors.

Article Link

Headlines: Online vs. Print

Online vs. Print, a tale of the times.

Whereas headlines in the print format have traditionally been bound by space limitations and font sizes, online headlines have a little bit more flexibility.

But what exactly does that mean?

The cover from Monday, Sept. 1 from the New Orleans Times-Picayune had their dominant headline read "Hunkering Down." While this works for print because it is paired with a dominant photograph of vacant New Orleans, if somebody were to subscribe to their RSS feeds and read a headline that simply says "Hunkering Down" without the other visual cues that accompany a print page would make no sense.

So what can online publications do to work around this problem?

Well, the simple suggestion would be to use the subhead as a headline. The subhead for this specific front page was "Weaker Gustav might give metro area breathing room." This headline when read on an RSS feed or an e-mail edition would make more sense than "Hunkering Down."

PDF of The New Orleans Times-Picayune