Pulitzer Prizes for Online Publications

Beginning now, in Dec. 2008, regular online publications will be considered for all 14 Pulitzer prize categories. This new expansion allows many more journalists to be recognized for their excellent work, online.

With more of the news industry finding success on the web, many publications have begun to publish solely online.

“This is an important step forward, reflecting our continued commitment to American newspapers as well as our willingness to adapt to the remarkable growth of online journalism,” Sig Gissler, the administrator of the prizes, said in a New York Times article.

This change came about in a board meeting in Nov. after reviewing results of an in-depth study.
It will open many doors for journalists all over the U.S. and proves the news industry's ability to adapt to whatever changes come about in the future.

With the recent reductions and cut backs in print newspapers across the country, and the file of bankruptcy by the Tribune Company, this report has been the only source of hope and good news for journalists.


Times article
Pulitzer Press Release
Pulitzer winners of 2008

Watchdog: the Chicago Tribune & Ill. governor

To say that Ill. governor, Rod Blagojevich, has gotten himself into some trouble lately is an understatement. Not only has he been involved in a corruption scandal, attempting to sell President-elect Obama's senate seat, but it seems he has also been threatening the Tribune.

With The Tribune filing bankruptcy Monday, the company is already in financial trouble, without the efforts of Blagojevich. The Times reported tonight that Blagojevich had been threatening the Chicago Tribune because of negative comments printed in the editorial section of the paper. He planned to disrupt The Tribune's efforts to sell the Cubs & Wrigley stadium, which would provide the Tribune with much need money during this economic crisis.

First of all, as a representative of the government, shouldn't Blagojevich know the Constitution? Press is protected by the 1st amendment, even children in jr. high could tell him that. And since when does the press listen to government officials on who to keep on staff?

America would not be a democracy without the freedom of the press, even the freedom to call for Blagojevich's impeachment. In The Times' article it said, "The writers were not fired, the editorial page continued to take on the governor, Tribune editors said Tuesday that they were not aware of any pressure from the governor’s office, and the company said it did not do the governor’s bidding."

One of the purposes of journalism is to be a watchdog, and that is what the Tribune has done. Even if Sam Zell did run The Tribune into the ground, at least he did not monitor the editorial section. In Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel's Elements of Journalism said,"As history showed us, it more properly means watching over the powerful few in society on behalf of the many to guard against tyranny."

"This logically implies that the press should recognize where powerful institutions are working effectively, as well as where they are not. How can the press purport to monitor the powerful if it does not illustrate the successes as well as the failures?"

Kovach and Rosenstiel go on to say later, "It is the implied covenant with the public...The notion that those who report the news are not obstructed from digging up and telling the truth- even at the expense of the owner's other financial interests-it is a prerequisite of telling the news not only accurately but persuasively."

Though it might be a financial cost for journalists and the press to speak against government officials and report on the failures of those officials, it is our job and duty to the public. How else can we prove as an honest and credible source?



Link to article
Picture

Joe the Plumber: Anyone's a writer?

I stumbled across a piece in the opinion section of The Times which I found reasonable and amusing. The columnist, Timothy Egan, wrote on how ridiculous it is that "Joe the Plumber" will release a book this month, on December 1oth, called "Joe the Plumber: Fighting for the American Dream".

Since I have been thinking frequently over the course of the semester about the definition of good journalism, or writing, I found Egan's thoughts interesting.

Egan said, "Publishers: with all the grim news of layoffs and staff cuts at the venerable houses of American letters, can we set some ground rules for these hard times? Anyone who abuses the English language on such a regular basis should not be paid to put words in print."

I think that as we've discussed what good journalism is, that all kinds of writing should be included. No matter what kind of writing one does (persuasive, investigative, narratives, novels, journalism, poetry, etc) only the good should be printed.

On a different note, I feel like the media is partly to blame for the new found fame of "Joe the Plumber". The media gorged themselves on his poorly-weaved story. They allowed politicians to make him close to an American icon. Samuel J. Wurzelbacher (Joe), has failed to pay his taxes and does not hold the adequate credentials to even be a plumber.

The press should have acted appropriately in the beginning, by doing a little investigative journalism. Once they uncovered this information on Wurzelbacher, they could have ended the charade. While this is America and everyone has the freedom and opportunities to do whatever they want, that does not mean they should, especially when it comes to writing.

Source: Typing Without a Clue

Grim outlook returns as Viacom/NBC cuts 1300 jobs

My positive perspective on the media business was not allowed to last longer than a day. The Times reported that 1,300 people lost their jobs today at Viacom and NBC Universal.

Viacom announced their "cost saving initiatives" or cuts could save up to $700 million dollars for both companies in 2009. It is no surprise that the media would not go untouched with the economic problems straining the American people. Other news corporations are considering cost savings as well.

With the industry already struggling to keep up advertising sales and profits when people are looking to the Internet for their main news source, an economic blow seems to be deepening the wound.

I cannot say that I am surprised, but as I am currently applying for the print program, the loss of even more jobs does not allow for hope.

What infuriates me in this frugal time is when executives continue to receive bonuses and salary raises. The chief executive of Viacom, Philppe Dauman, received a raise this year, earning $2.5 million compared to last year's $2 million. Guess his bonus. It was nothing short of $7 million last year and is expected to be around $9 million this year.

If the media industry is hurting so much that it is necessary to fire over 1,000 people, why on earth are the executives earning more? Their business are not doing better. The economy is worse. Why are they not feeling the effects of a recession as well?

It seems to me they are willing to let the news industry fail before they take a salary cut...or even maintain the same salary. My question is why is no one holding them accountable when our future is on the line?

Source
Viacom's press release

So a journalism degree is valuable afterall

It never occurred to me prior to today that I would be a part of the next generation of journalists. Eventually the people covering the news and events in the world right now will retire, die (or get fired...) and the job of maintaining democracy will fall upon the students studying journalism right now, which includes me.

This semester I have really pondered a lot on my future career, what journalism is, what my personal ethics are. Sometimes I often wonder why on earth I am going into a field where jobs seem to be shrinking (at least in traditional form). Another question I've asked myself several times is why I am majoring in print journalism when the profession does not even require a degree?

Poynter had an article by Chris Lavin with an interview of the Dean of Penn State, Doug Anderson. It discussed how a journalism degree is more valuable than ever before. The change from a negative perspective was refreshing.

Lavin said, "One sign of hope is the annual Hearst Collegiate Journalism Competition -- often called the Pulitzers of college journalism -- which included a multimedia category for the first time this year."

While so much is changing within the field of journalism, the advances in technology and alterations in curriculum allows and prepares for current students of journalism to branch out more creatively than before. This generation of news calls for higher quality stories and immediate distribution. We can cater to these new developments and demands.

As the future's journalists we must be knowledgeable of everything. Not just writing, but photography, design, and editing. This provides us the opportunity to become well-rounded, efficient journalists, as well as increase credentials for employment. Obtaining a degree in journalism is more valuable than ever before. Walking into a news room and asking for a job will no longer cut it. In order for the public to receive good journalism, news organizations must hire a better breed of journalists, ones that are aware of the changes and able to meet the demands of society.

To read the rest of Doug Anderson's interview: http://tinyurl.com/6hq3mt

Salvation Army Tweeting

With much of the recent discussion of Twitter,social sites and microblogs with Mumbai, it is no surprise that organizations, such as the Salvation Army, have begun to use it in their advertising campaigns. With the economy's current position, the Salvation Army is in more need than ever. The Salvation Army hopes that by targeting users of Twitter and Facebook, they can recruit a younger generation to help.

On Twitter, individual ''kettles" have been established so people can donate under certain organizations, such as the National Hockey League's Online Red Kettle.
Twitter / TSARedKettle

The Salvation Army has a Red Kettle application on Facebook that users can easily add and recruit friends.

While these sites (Facebook, Twitter, etc) have not only been available to provide news and social networking, organizations are now utilizing them in order to reach larger audiences. I think this is a great idea, especially for non-profit organizations that help and build communities. News is not the only thing traveling faster because of the web and microbloggers.

Article provided by cnn.com

Bloggers and Microbloggers

To be honest, I've had a difficult time adjusting to Twitter. Until recently, I've not been able to see the benefits and purpose of the site. While I'm still attempting to sort through it all, the terror attack in Mumbai last week has definitely provided me some insight into the effectiveness and influence sites such as Twitter have on world events. Especially when getting the news out.

After scrolling through many of the tweets last week focused on Mumbai, I saw how people were reporting what was going on faster than news networks around the world. Some people were complaining about cable broadcasting stations, one tweet, by Barbara Legge said "why is CNN the only cable news channel in the US broadcasting the Mumbai story; MSNBC is showing "Lock-up" & Fox has an O'Reilly re-run?" It was easy to see after scrolling through a page or two though, that some tweets were not factual or were reporting things that had happened much earlier and had already changed.

As soon as President-elect Obama had a statement about the attacks, the link was posted on Twitter. There were certain tweets providing phone numbers for relatives with family in Mumbai to call to report. The liscense plate number of the stolen jeep was was posted all over Twitter with the number to call police if someone saw it. This is such an advancement! Even reporters were tweeting, asking for people in Mumbai to contact them so that they could communicate with them using Skype. I think overall, the coverage by microbloggers and bloggers alike helped the situation.

There were a couple drawbacks, mostly sifting through the many condolances that did not provide any news. I found the condolances the most irritating on Twitter. I know people felt remorse for what was occurring, but I felt like it simply cluttered the real news and links that were tweeted, especially when it was only mentioned in passing after rambling on about their looking forward to turkey or Thanksgiving. I could see how the terrorists could use this information to their advantage, but would they have time to monitor the site while their plan is en route?
There has to be a better way to organize the influx of information that comes in when such an event happens.

I think this development of breaking news through blogs and microblogs will greatly affect journalism now and in the future. People no longer have to wait for the radio, scheduled news times on local stations, or for cable news to pick up breaking news. They can get it instantly on the web, provided by other people on the web. It provides the opportunity for so much more to be shared, instead of limiting the coverage to redundant cable news reporters.

Web a-twitter with terror attacks
Link discussing microblogger effects