It's All Happening

I graduated high school in 2007 and began my undergraduate studies in journalism the following fall. What I personally find most interesting about the ever-changing world of journalism is just how much it has changed from the time I got into this world to now. 2007 was a big year in your assignment blog post, as the iPhone was released and Twitter was launched. I know Facebook became more available to all users, not just colleges, around that time, and YouTube was garnering popularity by the second.

For me, the hardest part about analyzing this problem is striking a balance between side one: saving money, competing with the average citizen journalist and getting up quick, easy-to-click through content that you KNOW people will enjoy and side two (not sure why I’m treating this like a mix-tape): taking pride in our work and the time it takes to create a quality piece of journalism and holding on to the power and creativity that comes with being a journalist or “gate keeper.” Ever since my first journalism classes at The University of Missouri, professors have told us “It will be your job to figure out how to save journalism and keep the money coming in.” Even here, every once in a while, someone will say, “Oh, if you solve the problems in journalism right now, you’ll be made in the shade.” Well yes, obviously. But there’s a reason no one has quite figured it out yet. I think a lot of that has to do with the rapid rate at which everything is changing and the severe degree to which it is evolving.

Anyway, while pondering this topic, I came across this column (via Google news, although it’s actually from the paper I used to work at and write a column for back in Columbia – woo!). In it, columnist David Rosman looks at this YouTube video, which features a man with a video camera up on the police lines of Occupy Wall Street who is standing up to the police in the name of his rights. Yay, right? Not so much. The man neither has a press pass nor can state which paper he works for. Rosman points out that this is shedding bad light on all journalists who might be in his exact position WITH a press pass from a legitmate publication, and I think they will probably be treated much more poorly because of this man. That is a problem with citizen jouranlism I hadn’t even thought of. How do we make ourselves stand out (I guess a press pass is a decent answer – but now with all the craziness and crazies out there, who knows how much that means anymore) among the sea of citizen “jouranlists”? This video is also interesting because we’re not even watching the one that was shot by the man who said he was a journalist. We’re seeing this unfold through the eyes of someone who just happened to be there with an iPhone.

But for a small change of subject here with more of a focus on your actual question, I’m going to discuss magazines and their news model because that’s ultimately where I wish to work. When someone asks me what I think of newspapers, magazines and the journalism world in general right now, I often respond by saying I want to work in magazines not only because I love them but because I can truly defend their future with a sense of confidence (kind of a bummer that USPS is going to have huge cuts though, womp womp). Jeff Jarvis’ first reality check for newspapers is that circulation is going to continue to decline. I believe this is because you can find almost everything you see in a newspaper on the internet and it’s faster and cheaper. I subscribe to no newspaper, and I’ve even found myself reading the hard copy of my parents’ St. Louis Post-Dispatches less and less when I visit them at home (sad). I do stay up on the news, but instead of pulling out one daily paper, I get on Twitter where I scan the headlines of copious amounts of papers across the country and world. I visit CNN’s website, The New York Times and The Chicago Tribune.

I do, however, get Vanity Fair, Rolling Stone, Vogue and Nylon in the mail at this current time. That’s because you cannot replicate the experience of reading a magazine online. People want to read longer articles, they just don’t want to read them online. People don’t mind ads in magazines because they can be glossy and beautiful, not annoying background images that distract you or ridiculous commercials before a 30-second video. I’m a huge fan of the “Magazines: The Power of Print” ads that point out, among other things, that during the 12-year life of Google, magazine readership actually increased. I think it’s because magazines offer a product that you can’t duplicate online. While newspapers offer a product that is perfect for the web (aside from long-form, investigative pieces, but the budget for those has declined so much that that’s a problem in itself), magazines can only come close to having an equally satisfying virtual experience in tablets, and I believe the magazine industry will be smart enough to never offer up that content for free.

That might be where I truly feel we went wrong with newspapers. If only we could have a huge summit where each paper agrees to put up a pay wall, leaving the consumer no choice but to pick a paper to go with and actually pay for the content.

I sadly think we compromised our product and integrity when we took exactly what people have payed for for years and years and years and offered it up for free. But I also sadly take advantage of that and consume free news every day, all day.

I think the number one thing to do when looking at citizen journalism is strike a balance between doing what we do better than any average person could do it while also being realistic about time and money. We’ve talked so many times in class about how long it takes to shoot and edit a video and how few people watch them compared to a viral video of say, police pepper-spraying at Occupy Wall Street. It’s not to say that we shouldn’t take time to shoot and edit quality video, it’s just that perhaps we should pick and choose what we’re spending our time doing a bit more wisely and not assign or ask for video just for the hell of it.

Journalism will continue to struggle, but I honestly believe that when it comes down to it, people will always want and need gate keepers and legitimate places to go for news, we just have to continue to work on the business model and accept that tradition and old-fashioned practices need to go.

For the mobile reporting assignment, I used apps that I use on a pretty frequent basis and that I already had on my Blackberry: Twitter and Foursquare. I didn’t venture out of this comfort zone because although my Blackberry is a smart phone, it’s not the smartest, and I have found these apps to be easy-to-use and fairly problem-free.

I recently had to replace my Blackberry Curve after losing my previous Blackberry Curve, so the Twitter app I have now is a bit different than it was a few months ago. Although this one is designed well in terms of its organization and aesthetics, sometimes tweets take a while go to through, especially if there’s a photo involved. For example, at one point when I received my boarding pass, I took a picture of it and tweeted it so the reader could see my ticket and seat number, instead of me simply typing about my ticket and seat number. That tweet failed to go through, and once that happens, for whatever reason it seems I’m usually just out of luck, so I moved on and just typed it out.

I find Foursquare to be a very easy-to-use and functionable app. My updates always go through right away and it doesn’t ever take any time to load. However, I think Foursquare is much more limiting than Twitter. Once you check in somewhere, I think the updates from that place are finished. I mean, I could have checked in at the airport, and then at security and then in the concourse, but that seems much more exhaustive and unnecessary to me than simply tweeting. Also with Foursquare, you have the capability to upload a picture, but the photo won’t send to Twitter if that’s what you’re doing with the check-in (at least it won’t on a Blackberry).

However, combined, I think these two apps are all you need for mobile reporting. With Twitter’s photo and video capabilities, you can really do it all. I’m sure the whole process would have been easier and looked much better on an iPhone, but hey, I have Sprint and they just got the iPhone, so I’m waiting for my next upgrade. All-in-all, I’m content with my phone and the apps I used. I will definitely use them all again and would be happy to do more mobile reporting at a more “newsworthy” event.

I created my first map using Google Maps, and I found it fairly simple and user-friendly. I use Google Maps for directions on a daily basis, so the medium is familiar to me, which made the process much quicker than some of our other assignments where I’m working with new sites/locations. I did have one hiccup when some of my descriptions of the venues didn’t save, so I had to go back and rewrite them. Other than that, I was happy with my experience, and I would definitely use Google Maps again.

After having the same bad luck with uMapper as we did in class, I used Zee Maps as my second map-making app. It was also fairly easy, although there were a couple of annoying aspects to it. For instance, when I went to add a new point, the information for the previous point was still there. With that being said, sometimes the new point would end up getting mapped at the same address as the previous one, or I would forget to trade out the website, so that was just a tad annoying.

The next time I make a map, I think I’ll keep it simple and go with Google Maps.

I was surprised to find myself frustrated by the timeline assignment. After looking at examples in class and playing around with the sites before I got started last week, I thought it would be an easy, quick assignment. I used Capzles and Dipity to create my timeline about the the 2011 Bonnaroo festival.

I definitely favored Capzles over Dipity because I found it easier to use and much quicker. My one major qualm with Capzles is that I’m not sure how to simply use a link for a point on the timeline, NOT something I uploaded from my own computer. I was excited to create a timeline about Bonnaroo because of the plethora of videos out there, however, with no clear way on how to get to them, I found myself using the blog entry feature and then linking to a few performances within the blog. I think it would have looked much cleaner and felt much more user-friendly had I been able to simply post video links. At one point I also tried embedding a link into the blog so that you could at least see the video once without having to click out of the timeline, but I had trouble with that as well. Aside from that, the Capzles site is user-friendly and nice looking. If I can figure out how to use links instead of uploads, I would definitely use the site again.

I had a lot of trouble with Dipity. I kept having to click out of it and come back in because it was going so slow (while other sites on my computer were fine). I also had trouble going back into edit my timeline once I left the site, which was annoying. Oftentimes when I was working on adding an event, error messages would also pop up. When I look at completed timelines in Dipity, I think they look great and they seem like they would be easy to make. But after having to wait so long for every thing I wanted to do within my timeline, I do not think I would go back to this site. With that being said, it was nice that they offer places for links and videos.

UPDATE: After my problems with Dipity, I knew I needed to come back into this assignment before the end of the quarter. Because I’m pressed for time, I really wanted to find an easier way to make a timeline and not waste time waiting for Dipity to load only to be kicked out of being logged in. I just googled “create an online timeline” and Timetoast was the first thing that popped up. I found this to be the best timeline creating app of the three. There were no technical hookups, it was easy to add links and I liked how each time point could come with a picture without any hassle. I also enjoy the final look of the timeline. It’s not too fancy, but I don’t think there are any fancier apps that are problem-free enough to be considered better than Timetoast.

It would have been nice to be able to upload videos directly from my computer, but because there are so many YouTube videos of Bonnaroo that are better than mine, that wasn’t a huge deal. All in all, if I had to make another online timeline, I would definitely come back to Timetoast before Capzles or Dipity.

After using Vimeo and Youtube, I can definitely see that Vimeo is a sleeker, more professional site. However, like most people, I’ve used Youtube much more frequently throughout my time online, so I found that site comfortable and easy-to-use. It’s convinient that Adobe Premiere has an export feature for both – although I had trouble with the sizing of my video. It turned out smaller than the video window in each platform, so I think I must have made a mistake in Premiere.

I would definitely use both sites again. It’s hard for me to compare and contrast too much after this assignment, because both were easy to use and effective. It seems as though more people use Youtube, so if I were just uploading a video to the sites and not taking it and embedding it somewhere else, I would use Youtube. However, I really do like the look and feel of Vimeo, so for another journalism video, I think I would go back to that site first.

If Alexia Severson wasn’t a journalist, she thinks she’d be an architect. But the Medill student, 24, can’t imagine entering another profession.

“I’ve always liked to write,” Severson said. “I don’t really know what else I would do if I didn’t write.”

The New Mexico State University graduate also enjoys working out, cross-fit training and taking in Chicago’s nightlife.

“I like that there’s always something to do here,” she said. “There’s a million different types of restaurants to choose from.”

Although Severson loves the vast culinary choices offered in Chicagoland, she does miss the Mexican food she enjoyed in her hometown of Las Cruces, New Mexico, where she worked at the Las Cruces Sun News.

“Working there was a good experience, but it wasn’t something I would want to do for the rest of my life,” Severson said. “And it wasn’t good pay.”

She hopes her time at Medill will lead to a job, although she’s unsure of where she wants to settle down.

“I wouldn’t mind staying in Chicago,” she said. “But if we’re talking strictly the U.S., I’d say here or Colorado.”

If I were the web editor of a major U.S. paper breaking the story about Gadhafi’s capture and killing, I would run any photos and videos made available to us, but I would require the viewer to click through to a link after providing a warning. I think I would take the same route as the Sun-Times did by running a less-graphic photo on the homepage, with options to click through to a gallery or video below it. The Washington Post and The Huffington Post did a good job of providing a warning for graphic videos in follow-up coverage. To not provide a warning would leave viewers who don’t necessarily wish to see the bloodied body of Gadhafi feverishly clicking out of your site, thus preventing them from taking in other, less-graphic content.

I most certainly agree with Dana Milkbank who, while on “Reliable Sources,” said he’s in favor of running the photo, but also said, “Maybe you don’t put it on the front page so that the kid doesn’t see it at breakfast.” I also agreed with him in that as an editor, you have to realize that the majority of other news outlets are going to run the photograph one way or another, so arguably, you’re going to be missing out on coverage if you don’t do the same. Host Howard Klutz went on to say he felt like the picture was basically “wall paper” in the media that day, but I would have pointed out to him that despite the wide use of the gruesome photographs, any media outlet who disregarded them all together would have been doing a disservice to their readers and would have potentially been sending those seeking the graphic photos or video footage to other media outlets.

This controversy reminded me of a similar discussion I had during undergrad about running photos. I happened to be reading an issue of Rolling Stone at the time of the discussion featuring the article, “The Kill Team: How U.S. Soldiers in Afghanistan Murdered Innocent Civilians” with the subhead, “Plus: an exclusive look at the war crime images the Pentagon tried to censor.” Now, online, you must click through to the photos or videos, and they are then prefaced with a warning. However, in the magazine, the photos were run throughout the spread, and the only way to avoid them was to cover them up with a piece of paper or quickly turn the page. Although the photos were key to exposing the horrendous story, they were still extremely hard to look at, and to this day, they come to mind when I ponder running graphic content in print.

So, while there’s a seemingly easy solution for online images, for me, print is still an issue. Looking at Poynter’s roundup of covers, as an editor, I would have gone with something similar to The Star-Ledger or maybe The Washington Post. I think conveying the story through clever design or non-graphic photos that still tell the story is the best route to go for the front page. If my colleagues thought a photo of the bloodied Gadhafi was necessary, I would have done what The Washington Post did and ran it as a secondary photo, hopefully below the fold line.

After creating my own, I would give Storify a thumbs up. Although I haven’t seen too much from Storify aside from what I looked at for Digital Storytelling, I like the look and feel of a piece that’s been “storified.” It makes sense to me that the site is easily linked with Twitter. When I get on Twitter, I feel as if I’m using it as a hub in order to get to everything I want to read online, without having to go to each invidivdual site. I get on Twitter and I can see the New York Times’ latest headlines, I can see “What happened last night” through SPIN’s account and I can catch up on what’s going on both here in Chicago, in Columbia and in St. Louis. I see Storify as a similar tool, but more concentrated. If I want to read a story about Occupy Chicago, an entertainment event or say, The World Series (my chosen topic – go Cards!), I can take in information from Google, Twitter, Facebook, etc. without having to visit each site to gather what I need. I think Storify represents what news+the Internet is looking like these days.

With that being said – as a consumer, I love Storify. As the writer, I have mixed feelings.  I actually enjoyed putting my piece together. The site is extremely user friendly, and I love that you simply find what you’re looking for, click and drag in order to create your Storify. However, as  a person whose favorite part of journalism is the writing process and the creativity that can go into it (I’m on the magazine track, so I like to get as far away from the inverted pyramid as possible when writing), I can’t say I was nearly as satisfied as I often feel after writing a story, column, what have you. I tried to jazz up the writing, but I felt the point of the site is to get to the point and guide people quickly through your Storify so that they can use the links/tweets/Facebook posts you’ve given them to get the information.

So – would I use Storify again – both as a consumer and creator? Yes. But am I torn on this direction for journalism? Yes again. I understand this direction our world is taking, but I still want to hold onto the creative aspect of making a piece of journalism.

For my photo assignment, I used 500px, Flickr and Picassa to upload my photos. I think I used three of the most similar sharing sites, so I didn’t find myself having serious feelings toward one or the other and probably would have gotten more out of everything if I would have given myself more time to play around with different sites (note to self – I’m going to do that on my own today/this week). I had the easiest time making a slideshow with Picasa and thought the look and feel of 500px was the most aesthetically pleasing. However, with no obvious embed feature – 500px is now lacking in my book. I know Flickr is the Head Honcho of photo sharing sites, and I can see why. Although there’s a lot going on, and you need to explore the site a bit before being totally comfortable with it, it is easy to use and dependable. I thought the finished product in the form of a slideshow was simple and effective, with an easy embed feature.

When I did a re-shoot for this assignment, I opted to try out Vuvox instead of 500 px so that I could easily embed the slideshows in my blog. I think Vuvox is a little overwhelming at first. If you Google it, you’ll see it says “Vuvox- slideshows, photo, video and music sharing, Myspace codes …” etc. Once you’re in, it prompts you to choose between Express, Collage and Studio. I chose Studio because I wasn’t sure which to go with based on the descriptions, and the photo for Studio seemed the most simple. Once I got going within that option, I found the site very streamlined and simple – and embedding was a piece of cake (unlike 500 px). I think once I’ve worked with Vuvox a few times and play around with the different creation options, I’ll be much more comfortable and less overwhelmed when first going into the site.