For this week's blog post, I read an article from the AP about declining revenues for the New York Times. According to the article, the NYT's August revenues "slipped 8.7 percent as its classified ad sales continued to slide." August 2007 revenues ($218.5 million) were more than $19 million higher than the August 2008 revenues ($199.4 million). The article explains that revenues have continued to decline, because of the growing popularity of the internet and the fading interest in newspapers. Advertisers have followed this trend, and many non-computer based publications have suffered because of it. According to the article, total ad sales for the New York Times dropped 14.1 percent; at the same time, online ad sales for the paper have increased 7.9 percent.

For those of us either working in or hoping to find jobs in the field of journalism, this is an important issue. Where is the field headed? Will it be possible to find a job 10 years from now? 5 years from now? or even 1 year from now? Will a journalist's job be to make frequent updates on a blog? Or will the printed word make a comeback? How should we prepare? All of these questions are important and worth asking as we get closer and closer to hitting the job market.

How do you define a "journalist"?

I came across a story today on the topix.com Journalism News page titled "Jon Stewart: Comedian or Journalist?" (http://www.nbc10.com/entertainment/17394383/detail.html). This caught my attention because I began reading Chapter 5 of the "Elements of Journalism" book, which opens with a brief story of a partisan ex-political activist, William Safire, becoming a writer for the New York Times in the 1970s. This created a big stir, because people began to question how a presidential speech-writer could suddenly refer to himself as a journalist.

"What was it, then, that separated Safire from a partisan, activist, or propagandist? The question is increasingly pertinent to the delivery of news and information in the new century," the book states. "As the media landscape broadens and evolves to meet the needs of a more inclusive and activist public created by the social movements of the 1960s and the recent democratization of the content production, what makes something journalism?" (115).

This story about Jon Stewart makes it evident that we are still grappling with these blurred lines in the field of journalism today. For instance, as we have discussed in class, blogging is becoming increasingly popular -- do we refer to bloggers as journalists? And if so, are true "journalists" at risk of being undertaken by regular citizens who can communicate news and events in much the same way that we as journalists do?

This particular story attempts to identify Stewart as either a comedian or a journalist, and states that his identity is different depending on who you ask. While it is true that "The Daily Show" is a comedy program, it also delivers news, which creates a thin and often blurred line between comedy and journalism. Many would argue that his show is not true journalism in the sense that it mixes comedy in with the news -- it certainly is not the kind of news you would see on a regular newscast. The story also says, "This is the third presidential election in which Stewart has been at the helm of 'The Daily Show,' which has helped the 45-year-old host become one of the most respected journalists on television, according to a Pew Research Center for the People and the Press survey." Should we view Stewart as a journalist with the authority and ability to comment on politics, or simply as a comedian making light of politics? Should he be taken seriously as a "journalist" if he incorporates humor into the news?

And, the more important all-encompassing question, what makes someone a journalist, and what makes something journalism? Is it becoming more and more difficult to define?

Ethics in Journalism

One of the biggest issues in the field of journalism is ethics. Journalists constantly feel the need to try to assert themselves as moral, ethical, and trustworthy providers of important information. Yet despite all of the work that the majority of journalists do to gain the public's trust, it appears that readers are still skeptical. This skepticism grows every time a reporter makes a poor, unethical decision. For today's blog, I read an article from the Colorado Independent's Cara Degette that criticized Rocky Mountain News reporter Berny Morson for making an immoral decision in his coverage of a 3-year-old boys funeral.
According to Degette, Marten Kudlis, the boy whose funeral Morson covered, was killed last Thursday in Aurora, Colorado, when a car crashed into an ice cream shop where the boy was waiting in line. Kudlis' funeral took place yesterday; instead of writing a tactful piece about the funeral after it happened, Morson decided to 'tweet' the funeral. Using Twitter--an extremely informal, online communication system that Degette describes as being useful for "pals" to "text easy and quick messages...like 'Hey, just saw the coolest shoes at the mall"--Morson gave live updates on the boys funeral. The following is what was posted on the Rocky Mountain News website:

RMN_Berny: family members shovel earth into graveWednesday, Sep. 10, 11:40 a.m.RMN_Berny: rabbi calls end to ceremonyWednesday, Sep. 10, 11:28 a.m.RMN_Berny: rabbi chanting final prayer in hebrewWednesday, Sep. 10, 11:27 a.m.RMN_Berny: earth being placed on coffin.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 11:22 a.m.RMN_Berny: rabbi recites the main hebrew prayer of deathWednesday, Sep. 10, 11:20 a.m.RMN_Berny: rabbi zucker prayingWednesday, Sep. 10, 11:18 a.m.RMN_Berny: coffin lowered into groundWednesday, Sep. 10, 11:18 a.m.RMN_Berny: people gathering at gravesideWednesday, Sep. 10, 11:14 a.m.RMN_Berny: procession beginsWednesday, Sep. 10, 11:01 a.m.RMN_Berny: cars queueing up to follow hearseWednesday, Sep. 10, 10:59 a.m.RMN_Berny: pallbearers carry out coffin followed by mourners.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:48 a.m.RMN_Berny: people again are sobbing. rabbi again asks god to givemarten everlasting life.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:46 a.m.RMN_Berny: video shows marten blowing out candles on birthday cake,marten with dog. last images are of headlines.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:44 a.m.RMN_Berny: video of marten is projected on screen.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:32 a.m.RMN_Berny: rabbi says marten is close to god now.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:31 a.m.RMN_Berny: rabbi says marten loved to be tickled. calls the death anightmare. no words can sooth us, he says.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:28 a.m.RMN_Berny: family member says marten is with grandmother who diedlast year. ‘ marten we loved you,’ he says. People sobbing.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:22 a.m.RMN_Berny: family member remembers marten.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:20 a.m.RMN_Berny: rabbi says we will always remember marten and he will livein our memory.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:18 a.m.RMN_Berny: rabbi recites 23rd psalm.Wednesday, Sep. 10, 10:16 a.m.

In our text, we see that "Journalism's first obligation is to the truth;" however, we also see that "[Journalism's] first loyalty is to its citizens." Such down-played, informal coverage of a little-boys tragic death is unethical. It is this type of behavior that furthers the distrust between journalists and the public.

RMN "Tweets" funeral of 3-year old boy killed in ice cream shop

The Colorado Independent reported that RMN (Rockey Mountain News) 'Tweets" the funeral of a 3-year old boy killed in an ice cream shop. "Tweets" refers to the social networking service Twitter, which allows friends to text easy and quick messages to each other. The RMN used Twitter to live blog the funeral today of Marten Kudlis. Kudlis was killed last Thursday when Francis Hernandez, an illegal immigrant, crashed into a Baskin Robbins store where the boy was waiting to get ice cream. Because the reporter live blogged the funeral he was only able to write quick straight forward sentences. The technology did not allow for any empthy or any emotion whatsoever. The RMN reporter texted phrases such as,

RMN_Berny: family members shovel earth into grave
Wednesday, Sep. 10, 11:40 a.m.
RMN_Berny: rabbi calls end to ceremony
Wednesday, Sep. 10, 11:28 a.m.
RMN_Berny: rabbi chanting final prayer in hebrew
Wednesday, Sep. 10, 11:27 a.m.
RMN_Berny: earth being placed on coffin.
Wednesday, Sep. 10, 11:22 a.m.

Although bloggging is leading journalism in new directions, we must stop and think about the way we convey ourselves when using a technology that limits human emotion. A text/chat blogging service should not be used to cover a funeral. It is extrememly rude to take a very emotional experience like a funeral, or even a wedding and sum it up with text messages.

http://www.coloradoindependent.com/7717/rmn-tweets-the-funeral-of-3-year-old-boy/

The changing Newsroom

http://www.journalism.org/node/11961

The article raised a number of questions regarding the change taking place in the way news works, and the way reporters and editors work. Based on the results of a series of interviews and elaborate surveys completed by senior newsroom executives, the article states that todays reporters have "less knowledge of their community." This forced me to wonder how important it is for reporters and thus the news that they report to the community to be personal, to be connected to those they have delivering the news to. Many could argue that the job of a reporter is to connect with society, to know what they want to hear and what they are all about. But now that reporting itself and the interests of society seem to be changing, at times even conflicting, how important is it? Very little about the media remains intimate with the public anymore because the public no longer seems terribly concerned by it. Everything moves so fast these days, and the public seems to be more concerned with receiving news as fast as possible than receiving news that reflects a reporter who has truly taken the time to know the community or the issue at hand. This raises another issue. With the internet offering immediate news, and immediate responses to questions, how can reporters in the newsroom compete? Obviously much of the news on the web is not created not by professional reporters but self-made newswriters, and much of the information is not checked for corrections, so true reporters need to get the right information out there as fast as they can. But when news is delivered immediately via web, how can reporters take the necessary time to fact check and be as detailed as possible in their articles while still competing to deliver news as fast or nearly as fast. And how can editors make the necessary time to edit and fact check? As the article demands of readers at the end, with todays new types and expectations of news, "what is being gained, and what is being lost?"

The Lee Abrams Experience: How to hear the man who would transform Tribune

http://www.cjr.org/feature/the_lee_abrams_experience.php?page=4
This article is roughly about Lee Abrams and how he his changing so many different tribunes around the country, supposedly for the better. This in a sense could be a good thing, but at the same time is being looked at by news room vets as the end of journalism as everyone knows it. One of the most interesting things in this six page magazine article is the fact that in the past year, news papers have been folding in on themselves, forcing layoffs and downsizing all around. This relates pretty well to what we talked about in class the other day, with the face of journalism changing, and forcing everyone else to follow suit. Part of this cut in journalism jobs is blamed on such things as Craigslist which takes away from newspaper ads, and the housing bust. The article continues on with how more Tribune Companies are aquiring loads of dept and are forced to have more lay offs, while at the same time Abrams is quoted to say that he thinks "News and Information is the NEW Rock n' Roll". Either way, the article is good to look at and get people thinking about where journalism is going and what can be done to help. After all, we are the future of this profession.

Jersey's Largest Paper Goes Without AP Today -- Protest or Test?

It's admirable to see a paper attempting to send a message to the AP for raising their prices, but it is moronic from an editor's standpoint to omit articles that will better the paper. From a sports (I know I keep making everything about sports media, I'm trying not to) standpoint, if you're a New Jersey paper and are leaving out a story in your sports section about an out-of-town team that would be of interest to Yankees or Mets fan, you are doing a disservice to your readers and risking losing some. Remember that your fight is with the AP, so try a tactic that will hurt them more than you or your readers. Leaving out stories that may be of importance weakens a paper's legitimacy and, to a degree, cuts readers out of the loop. I don't care if it's for a day or for a year, it's never a good idea to put out a lesser product.