7.12.2007
Washington Post Visit
I was shocked at the style and design of the Washingtonpost.com newsroom. Everything looked so neat and in its proper place; it looked nothing like a television newsroom. The employees all seemed young and the place was so quiet. It felt like a luxury library. I was also surprised by the number of people being trained to do some sort of multimedia in addition to print stories. Everyone says journalists need to be multifaceted, and the Post.com seems to be on the right path. I just wonder how much on-camera these print reporters will eventually do. John Kelley is a funny guy but he has an annoying voice and doesn't look that great on television. Does he deserve all of that air time in addition to writing for the paper? It will be interesting to see how far the Post.com takes its video component.
Washington Post visit
Today's visit was a huge eye opener for me in the sense that I need to learn more skills and hone all my abilities to compete in this field. It is a broadcast vs. print battle and I am not sure there is a winner in the end. This visit made me more intersted in learning about broadcast practices and skills because it appears that that is the future but at the same time, he insisted that the key to any job, journalism or not, is strong writing skills.
I thought it was funny when he was talking about social networking and its advancements in changing the face of jounalism. I was thinking about our ethics discussion and whether it is appropriate, as a journalist, to go into chatrooms to find and meet people for possible stories. It got me thinking about finding people by social networking because even if you are not friends with someone on facebook or myspace, you are bound to know someone who knows them or a way to find them. These "friends" we have are our connection to everyone else on the internet and it is scary to think about how easy it is to find someone, it is just as easy for a reporter to find you or to create a story idea based on your conversations with friends, pictures and details. Reporters are always looking for hot new ideas!
I thought it was funny when he was talking about social networking and its advancements in changing the face of jounalism. I was thinking about our ethics discussion and whether it is appropriate, as a journalist, to go into chatrooms to find and meet people for possible stories. It got me thinking about finding people by social networking because even if you are not friends with someone on facebook or myspace, you are bound to know someone who knows them or a way to find them. These "friends" we have are our connection to everyone else on the internet and it is scary to think about how easy it is to find someone, it is just as easy for a reporter to find you or to create a story idea based on your conversations with friends, pictures and details. Reporters are always looking for hot new ideas!
7.11.2007
washingtonpost.com visit
I regularly visit washingtonpost.com. In fact, I read it more than the paper, which often heads straight to the recycle bin. Yet, even as a broadcast student, I had never clicked on the video links before. I was fascinated by the video links he showed us, especially the Tier 2 and Tier 3 types of video. I had never really considered working for the online side of a newspaper outlet before because I figured all their video would be just interviews and adding some B-roll with a cheap video camera. I was impressed by the editing suite and the documentaries on the site, and today's visit has opened up a new avenue for my job search.
Another thing I had never thought about before is that sports reporters don't work in the mornings. I guess I figured that with tennis, golf, the Tour du France, etc. that sports would be a daytime job as well. I knew today would be slow for the sports department, as there are no major professional sports games to cover (the third of three straight days a year that this exists because of the All-Star Game).
I would be interested to see how the Post continues to develop its site to get viewers to visit more pages on the site. I think the toolbar at the top has a lot of potential to be better developed and more efficient for viewers. I think the City Guide could be more prominently displayed, as well. I know in the past, the archives of the Going Out Gurus blog has been difficult to navigate, and I hope that can be improved.
Another thing I had never thought about before is that sports reporters don't work in the mornings. I guess I figured that with tennis, golf, the Tour du France, etc. that sports would be a daytime job as well. I knew today would be slow for the sports department, as there are no major professional sports games to cover (the third of three straight days a year that this exists because of the All-Star Game).
I would be interested to see how the Post continues to develop its site to get viewers to visit more pages on the site. I think the toolbar at the top has a lot of potential to be better developed and more efficient for viewers. I think the City Guide could be more prominently displayed, as well. I know in the past, the archives of the Going Out Gurus blog has been difficult to navigate, and I hope that can be improved.
washingtonpost.com trip
What I took away from today's trip to the washingtonpost.com office was a greater realization that today's reporters need to be competent in several media. When I chose to major in journalism three years ago, it never occurred to me that I'd be doing anything beyond writing and editing.
But in my classes here I have heard several times that a print reporter has to be more than just a print reporter. Today's trip reinforced that.
One specific point Chet Rhodes mentioned was that print reporters need to feel comfortable talking about their stories intelligently in front of a camera. I had thought about this recently, but in a slightly different light. I regularly listen to Washington Post Radio, and I often hear reporters being interviewed about the stories they write. So I figured that reporters working for the paper were also expected to be able to give a good radio interview.
But there's more to it than that. A "real" reporter needs to be able to write, edit, photograph, talk about his story on the radio, take audio and video clips, and talk about the story in front of a camera. And don't forget those Web skills.
But in my classes here I have heard several times that a print reporter has to be more than just a print reporter. Today's trip reinforced that.
One specific point Chet Rhodes mentioned was that print reporters need to feel comfortable talking about their stories intelligently in front of a camera. I had thought about this recently, but in a slightly different light. I regularly listen to Washington Post Radio, and I often hear reporters being interviewed about the stories they write. So I figured that reporters working for the paper were also expected to be able to give a good radio interview.
But there's more to it than that. A "real" reporter needs to be able to write, edit, photograph, talk about his story on the radio, take audio and video clips, and talk about the story in front of a camera. And don't forget those Web skills.
washingtonpost.com trip
Brian Katkin
6/11/07
Harvey
Washingtonpost.com is the first online journalism newsroom that I have ever visited. I thought it looked fairly similar to other newsrooms. Before I arrived, I was expecting it to be a little different in that I was expecting it to be significantly smaller with fewer employees.
When Chet was talking to us in the conference room, one thing in particular stuck with me. I thought it was particularly interesting when he said that the way to succeed in the journalism industry is not to continue staying one-dimensional with the journalism tract you’re on now, but to learn something else. For instance, if you’re doing print journalism, start trying to learn aspects of broadcast journalism and vice versa.
With regards to the Web site, I thought it was interesting that Chet pointed out where on the page users are more likely to click. I would imagine it’s a little bothersome to video journalists, like Travis Fox, when well-done video packages (i.e. the Darfur video package) are in places on the page where users are unlikely to click. I also thought it was interesting that washingtonpost.com has so many different types of video players; I would have thought that it would be easier to simply decide upon one and make that the uniform video player throughout the Web site.
6/11/07
Harvey
Washingtonpost.com is the first online journalism newsroom that I have ever visited. I thought it looked fairly similar to other newsrooms. Before I arrived, I was expecting it to be a little different in that I was expecting it to be significantly smaller with fewer employees.
When Chet was talking to us in the conference room, one thing in particular stuck with me. I thought it was particularly interesting when he said that the way to succeed in the journalism industry is not to continue staying one-dimensional with the journalism tract you’re on now, but to learn something else. For instance, if you’re doing print journalism, start trying to learn aspects of broadcast journalism and vice versa.
With regards to the Web site, I thought it was interesting that Chet pointed out where on the page users are more likely to click. I would imagine it’s a little bothersome to video journalists, like Travis Fox, when well-done video packages (i.e. the Darfur video package) are in places on the page where users are unlikely to click. I also thought it was interesting that washingtonpost.com has so many different types of video players; I would have thought that it would be easier to simply decide upon one and make that the uniform video player throughout the Web site.
Post Visit
I could not believe how many people worked at washingtonpost.com. It truly was amazing they had upwards of 200 people employed there. This added to the fact that they had very little original content seemed very odd.
Also to be a bit trivial, the starting salaries were also extremely high. Danny and I were talking about this and think it is most likely due to the fact that it is a tech job, which are still increasing in demand and salary.
Visiting the offices and seeing that they really do a lot more than just writing made online a very attractive option if broadcasting is not the correct path for me.
Also to be a bit trivial, the starting salaries were also extremely high. Danny and I were talking about this and think it is most likely due to the fact that it is a tech job, which are still increasing in demand and salary.
Visiting the offices and seeing that they really do a lot more than just writing made online a very attractive option if broadcasting is not the correct path for me.
Washingtonpost.com Field Trip Reflections
I enjoyed today's tour of washingtonpost.com's newsroom; it was surely not what I expected or imagined it would be. I thought it would be an archaic and monotonous office-setting with traditional cubicles with the chaos and commotion that's stereotypically associated with newsrooms, such as phones ringing off the hook, reporters shouting to one another across the newsroom, editors running around frantically to publish the next story, etc. Instead, the office was quite tranquil, modernized and well-designed to meet the needs for the 21st century.
I was quite surprised to see the broadcast (radio and television) elements and aspects of Washingtonpost.com. I was even more surprised and even a little anxious when Chet informed us of how not only the print, but also the broadcast industry is declining, more rapidly than what I initially thought, and that everything is truly converging unto the Web.
I would have to firmly agree with Chet and say that Washingtonpost.com has too much going on in their main page, which can be very inundating and distracting to visitors who may be easily turned off by just the overwhelming amount of information. For me personally, it's way too cluttered for me to denote what's important, especially on the bottom portion of the home page. One specific ad that annoys me each time I go to Washingtonpost.com is the main page advertisement that automatically enlarges to the size of your computer screen and doesn't go away fast enough. I believe that the broadcast features and elements (photos, videos and audio) are working quite well on the site with the traditional text; it just needs more publicity and awareness in order to attract visitors to the site.
Though, all in all, I had an enjoyable experience at the Washingtonpost.com office.
I was quite surprised to see the broadcast (radio and television) elements and aspects of Washingtonpost.com. I was even more surprised and even a little anxious when Chet informed us of how not only the print, but also the broadcast industry is declining, more rapidly than what I initially thought, and that everything is truly converging unto the Web.
I would have to firmly agree with Chet and say that Washingtonpost.com has too much going on in their main page, which can be very inundating and distracting to visitors who may be easily turned off by just the overwhelming amount of information. For me personally, it's way too cluttered for me to denote what's important, especially on the bottom portion of the home page. One specific ad that annoys me each time I go to Washingtonpost.com is the main page advertisement that automatically enlarges to the size of your computer screen and doesn't go away fast enough. I believe that the broadcast features and elements (photos, videos and audio) are working quite well on the site with the traditional text; it just needs more publicity and awareness in order to attract visitors to the site.
Though, all in all, I had an enjoyable experience at the Washingtonpost.com office.
Washingtonpost.com
While I regularly go to check my news at www.washingtonpost.com, I am sometimes distracted by the large advertisements on the page. For example, today's home page has a huge rectangular ad for Covidien, which takes up at least one third of the page. I know that advertisements are crucial for an online site to keep functioning, but I think they should be placed elsewhere on the page. You don't see large ads taking up large portions of the front page of the hard copy, so why have it on the online copy? I also dislike how the site puts the "Most Viewed" articles section at the top. I don't think that this is very important information and would fit better at the bottom of the page.
One of my favorite part's of Washingtonpost.com is the city guide. I think this attracts more than just the average person interested in reading the daily news. I also love how easy this site is to navigate. It is very easy to find what you are looking for-whether it be sports, cooking, fashion, archives, etc.
One of my favorite part's of Washingtonpost.com is the city guide. I think this attracts more than just the average person interested in reading the daily news. I also love how easy this site is to navigate. It is very easy to find what you are looking for-whether it be sports, cooking, fashion, archives, etc.
washingtonpost.com field trip
I learned a lot from today's field trip to washingtonpost.com. I use the site almost daily, but I was surprised when Chet showed us the new video application at the bottom of the home page. I don't recall seeing it and I know for sure that I haven't used it yet. I thought it was interesting that it does matter where these sorts of things are placed; some site users may never get to it if they don't scroll down!
I thought it was interesting when Chet talked about how the site uses three different ways to present video clips and how that was not a good thing because it confuses users. I know for me, I'm really impatient so when I try to watch clips and they take forever to load or I can't work the program, then I don't even bother to try. I think it's important that washingtonpost.com works together to find the best and most efficient way to stream their video clips.
I was also surprised at the laid-back and quiet environment of the whole office. When I think of newsrooms, I think of phones ringing non-stop, reporters running around, sounds of television news and messy papers everywhere. I guess since Chet said the main tasks they do at this specific office are produce blogs and media clips, the environment is less chaotic then the main office for The Washington Post would be.
I thought it was interesting when Chet talked about how the site uses three different ways to present video clips and how that was not a good thing because it confuses users. I know for me, I'm really impatient so when I try to watch clips and they take forever to load or I can't work the program, then I don't even bother to try. I think it's important that washingtonpost.com works together to find the best and most efficient way to stream their video clips.
I was also surprised at the laid-back and quiet environment of the whole office. When I think of newsrooms, I think of phones ringing non-stop, reporters running around, sounds of television news and messy papers everywhere. I guess since Chet said the main tasks they do at this specific office are produce blogs and media clips, the environment is less chaotic then the main office for The Washington Post would be.
7.05.2007
Comment on "Citizens' media gets richer"
Something in one of this week's readings, "Citizens' media gets richer" by OJR's J.D. Lasica, struck me as particularly interesting.
Lasica quotes Michael Tippett, founder of NowPublic.com: "The big news organizations always say, we have journalism school grads and Pulitzer Prize winners and people trained in the craft. Fair enough, but you have two people on the story, and we already may have 20 or 50. What happens when we have 2,000 people covering that story? There will come a point where they can't compete," he says.
(To read Lasica's complete story: http://www.ojr.org/ojr/stories/090805lasica/index.cfm.)
Is it true that two professional, experienced reporters can't compete with 2,000 citizen journalists? If so, why is there a need for staff reporters at all? News organizations could rely entirely on the public for content.
I would argue that even 2,000 citizen journalists are not necessarily better than two veteran reporters. While I believe in the importance of citizen journalism as part of the news--I agree with Lasica that it adds "emotional depth and first-hand experience"--it cannot be the only source of news.
Yes, there are many "regular people" who write and photograph beautifully, and I hope the public continues to benefit from their talent. But I think it would be going too far to say that a small number of Pulitzer Prize winners cannot compete with dozens, even hundreds, of "regulars."
I'd be interested to hear your opinions on this.
Lasica quotes Michael Tippett, founder of NowPublic.com: "The big news organizations always say, we have journalism school grads and Pulitzer Prize winners and people trained in the craft. Fair enough, but you have two people on the story, and we already may have 20 or 50. What happens when we have 2,000 people covering that story? There will come a point where they can't compete," he says.
(To read Lasica's complete story: http://www.ojr.org/ojr/stories/090805lasica/index.cfm.)
Is it true that two professional, experienced reporters can't compete with 2,000 citizen journalists? If so, why is there a need for staff reporters at all? News organizations could rely entirely on the public for content.
I would argue that even 2,000 citizen journalists are not necessarily better than two veteran reporters. While I believe in the importance of citizen journalism as part of the news--I agree with Lasica that it adds "emotional depth and first-hand experience"--it cannot be the only source of news.
Yes, there are many "regular people" who write and photograph beautifully, and I hope the public continues to benefit from their talent. But I think it would be going too far to say that a small number of Pulitzer Prize winners cannot compete with dozens, even hundreds, of "regulars."
I'd be interested to hear your opinions on this.
Blogs you like...
Class, here are some of the blogs that I didn't list that you told me you liked -- along with your comments and suggestions for improvement:
From Annie:
http://perezhilton.com/
1) This blog consists of news updates on celebrity behavior.
2) The content of the blog is entertaining yet trashy. It feeds on the celebrity-driven pop culture. The site is easy to navigate. With links to pages and celebrity knowledge quizzes, there is tons of visitor interaction. The site doesn’t have any archives and only keeps records for the past couple of days.
3) I would visit the site merely because I, too, am celebrity obsessed. I don’t really care what the blogger says, but I am interested in the pictures.
4) I would eliminate the amount of commentary on the blog. The pictures and headlines are the interesting factors -- not what a nobody person has to say.
From Danny:
http://zeitgeist.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/06/29/249575.aspx
1. My blog of choice, at the moment, is maintained by MSNBC’s Willie Geist, a producer/on-air co-host/jack of all trades for the cable network. He describes his blog as such:
“Willie Geist has maintained since 1996 that the Internet, like the automobile and the television before it, is a fad. He gets his information from microfiche at the public library and communicates with friends through the good old-fashioned United States Postal Service, thank you very much.”
The site is decidedly tongue-in-cheek, but it is a great place to read about network news and other goings-on the media business. It is an opinion blog.
2. The content is good. Geist is funny and usually keeps his posts fresh. It is easy to move around and find archived posts. Also, the site is big on user comments. Basically the entire main page scrolls with comments (after Geist’s post, of course). Fans of Geist have an easy way to access or comment on his page. Interaction on this blog seems high.
3. I would look at this site again. I watch Geist with Tucker Carlson all the time. He is witty and bitingly sarcastic. I like going to his blog for more of the same.
4. The site could have comments on a separate page. I would rather see more of his posts on the front page. I really do not care to see 100 people comment on one post. For instance, his latest entry refers to MSNBC anchor Mika Brzezinski refusing the read the Paris Hilton story as the lead for a morning newscast. There are dozens of people who wrote to the blog saying roughly the same things (congratulating Brzezinski on taking a stand). I don’t need to see that. Show me other, even slightly older, blog posts instead.
From Aliza:
Frozen Tropics (http://frozentropics.blogspot.com)
“Frozen Tropics” is a blog about the Trinidad and H Street NE areas of Washington, D.C.
It is a news roundup, and occasionally an opinion/commentary blog.
The author, Inked, links to articles written about the area; posts press releases from politicians, developers and upcoming events; takes photographs of things she sees in the area and muses on changes in the area. The content is sometimes nothing more than links, but sometimes it is long.
The blog is the source of information on my neighborhood. It is easy to navigate, with archives on the right-hand navigation bar, as well as links to news organizations, local businesses, politicians who serve the area and more.
Readers interact with the blog through comments, and inked responds to many of the comments. Readers often also interact with each other through the comments. Inked also provides many links for readers to click on.
I read this blog often because of the news it provides. Inked also linked to one or two articles I wrote last summer on the area, and we have a mutual friend.
One way for the blog to be improved is to disallow anonymous commenters because there are often multiple commenters, and keeping track of who said what can get confusing. Another way to improve the blog would be for Inked to take on more writers so that the blog could be updated more frequently.
From Aditya:
The Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
This blog aggregates the posts from several contributors and categorizes them under ‘Politics,’ ‘Business,’ ‘Entertainment,’ etc.
Most of the posts are commentaries. Small excerpts or summaries accompany the links to the opinion pieces. Many of the articles are on Huffington’s Web site, others are external links. The contributors come from very different backgrounds, and some may be more credible than others. The blog provides links to short biographies of each contributor.
Huffington’s blog seems to encourage interactivity since it allows users to instantaneously post comments to articles. The blog does not seem to have an archive of its own, but allows users to search it quite easily.
Huffington Post is a good place to look for left-of-center commentary and analysis, but seems to have little use otherwise.
More to come...
From Annie:
http://perezhilton.com/
1) This blog consists of news updates on celebrity behavior.
2) The content of the blog is entertaining yet trashy. It feeds on the celebrity-driven pop culture. The site is easy to navigate. With links to pages and celebrity knowledge quizzes, there is tons of visitor interaction. The site doesn’t have any archives and only keeps records for the past couple of days.
3) I would visit the site merely because I, too, am celebrity obsessed. I don’t really care what the blogger says, but I am interested in the pictures.
4) I would eliminate the amount of commentary on the blog. The pictures and headlines are the interesting factors -- not what a nobody person has to say.
From Danny:
http://zeitgeist.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/06/29/249575.aspx
1. My blog of choice, at the moment, is maintained by MSNBC’s Willie Geist, a producer/on-air co-host/jack of all trades for the cable network. He describes his blog as such:
“Willie Geist has maintained since 1996 that the Internet, like the automobile and the television before it, is a fad. He gets his information from microfiche at the public library and communicates with friends through the good old-fashioned United States Postal Service, thank you very much.”
The site is decidedly tongue-in-cheek, but it is a great place to read about network news and other goings-on the media business. It is an opinion blog.
2. The content is good. Geist is funny and usually keeps his posts fresh. It is easy to move around and find archived posts. Also, the site is big on user comments. Basically the entire main page scrolls with comments (after Geist’s post, of course). Fans of Geist have an easy way to access or comment on his page. Interaction on this blog seems high.
3. I would look at this site again. I watch Geist with Tucker Carlson all the time. He is witty and bitingly sarcastic. I like going to his blog for more of the same.
4. The site could have comments on a separate page. I would rather see more of his posts on the front page. I really do not care to see 100 people comment on one post. For instance, his latest entry refers to MSNBC anchor Mika Brzezinski refusing the read the Paris Hilton story as the lead for a morning newscast. There are dozens of people who wrote to the blog saying roughly the same things (congratulating Brzezinski on taking a stand). I don’t need to see that. Show me other, even slightly older, blog posts instead.
From Aliza:
Frozen Tropics (http://frozentropics.blogspot.com)
“Frozen Tropics” is a blog about the Trinidad and H Street NE areas of Washington, D.C.
It is a news roundup, and occasionally an opinion/commentary blog.
The author, Inked, links to articles written about the area; posts press releases from politicians, developers and upcoming events; takes photographs of things she sees in the area and muses on changes in the area. The content is sometimes nothing more than links, but sometimes it is long.
The blog is the source of information on my neighborhood. It is easy to navigate, with archives on the right-hand navigation bar, as well as links to news organizations, local businesses, politicians who serve the area and more.
Readers interact with the blog through comments, and inked responds to many of the comments. Readers often also interact with each other through the comments. Inked also provides many links for readers to click on.
I read this blog often because of the news it provides. Inked also linked to one or two articles I wrote last summer on the area, and we have a mutual friend.
One way for the blog to be improved is to disallow anonymous commenters because there are often multiple commenters, and keeping track of who said what can get confusing. Another way to improve the blog would be for Inked to take on more writers so that the blog could be updated more frequently.
From Aditya:
The Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
This blog aggregates the posts from several contributors and categorizes them under ‘Politics,’ ‘Business,’ ‘Entertainment,’ etc.
Most of the posts are commentaries. Small excerpts or summaries accompany the links to the opinion pieces. Many of the articles are on Huffington’s Web site, others are external links. The contributors come from very different backgrounds, and some may be more credible than others. The blog provides links to short biographies of each contributor.
Huffington’s blog seems to encourage interactivity since it allows users to instantaneously post comments to articles. The blog does not seem to have an archive of its own, but allows users to search it quite easily.
Huffington Post is a good place to look for left-of-center commentary and analysis, but seems to have little use otherwise.
More to come...
7.03.2007
Blogging Assignment
Class, this assignment is to be done independently. Please turn it in by e-mail to me by 11:10 a.m. on Thursday, July 5. Happy holiday!
Directions: Quickly check out the following eight Web logs.
Go back and take more time with two of them, plus any other blog of your choosing. (Check out http://www.technorati.com/ for listings of blogs if you don’t already have a favorite.)
For each of those three that you analyze, BRIEFLY answer the following:
1. Is this a reported blog, an opinion/commentary blog, an author’s journal, a news roundup, or something else entirely?
2. How good is the content? How easy is it to navigate and find archival entries? How well does it encourage reader interaction?
3. Would you look at this site again if you didn’t have to?
4. How could it be improved?
Please type up your answers and e-mail them to me.
Here are eight sites to start your review with:
http://www.wonkette.com/
http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/
http://www.buzzmachine.com/
http://www.beloblog.com/ProJo_Blogs/SoxBlog/
http://www.newmediamusings.com/
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=31
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=45
http://jbshyu.typepad.com/
Directions: Quickly check out the following eight Web logs.
Go back and take more time with two of them, plus any other blog of your choosing. (Check out http://www.technorati.com/ for listings of blogs if you don’t already have a favorite.)
For each of those three that you analyze, BRIEFLY answer the following:
1. Is this a reported blog, an opinion/commentary blog, an author’s journal, a news roundup, or something else entirely?
2. How good is the content? How easy is it to navigate and find archival entries? How well does it encourage reader interaction?
3. Would you look at this site again if you didn’t have to?
4. How could it be improved?
Please type up your answers and e-mail them to me.
Here are eight sites to start your review with:
http://www.wonkette.com/
http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/
http://www.buzzmachine.com/
http://www.beloblog.com/ProJo_Blogs/SoxBlog/
http://www.newmediamusings.com/
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=31
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=45
http://jbshyu.typepad.com/
The Power of Blogging
Here's an article in the Post yesterday demonstrating the increasing influence of blogs on the mainstream:
Calling in Pros to Refine Your Google Image
One thing to consider is that Webmasters can manipulate search engine algorithms to have their sites come up as one of the first listings. So, no matter what companies like ReputationDefender.com could do, there will always be malicious coders who will ruin any attempts that you fork over thousands of dollars for to improve your online prestige. What's even more funny is that people found a market in making people look good on the Web. My take on the situation: you can't make people like you.
Here's a good read on how search engines work
And here's a Wired.com article about search engine manipulation
Calling in Pros to Refine Your Google Image
One thing to consider is that Webmasters can manipulate search engine algorithms to have their sites come up as one of the first listings. So, no matter what companies like ReputationDefender.com could do, there will always be malicious coders who will ruin any attempts that you fork over thousands of dollars for to improve your online prestige. What's even more funny is that people found a market in making people look good on the Web. My take on the situation: you can't make people like you.
Here's a good read on how search engines work
And here's a Wired.com article about search engine manipulation
6.30.2007
In Case You Missed It,...
MSNBC anchor Mika Brzezinski had just about enough of the Paris Hilton story when she refused to lead her news report with Paris Hilton post-prison updates. On "Morning Joe" with co-hosts Joe Scarborough and Willie Geist, Brzezinski tried to torch the script with a lighter, crumpled it into a ball and finally sent it through a paper shredder. I appreciate what she did, as I, too, am completely sick of Paris Hilton and the coverage her prison sentence garnered. Brzezinski stood up to her network on the air and refused to grant the Hilton story numero uno coverage. It really became a big deal because Joe and Willie made fun of Mika for refusing to read the script. Still, few journalists of her level would have the guts to do that.
Also, I was clicking around my television Saturday morning and turned to NBC's HD channel. I thought I would just see an HD version of the "Today" show, but instead some groggy-eyed producer put the studio feed on the air, so I watched an anchorwoman practicing her script and talking to producers about pronunciations and camera angles. I have never seen the network news make a blunder like that. After watching the anchor stumble through the copy three times, it kind of took away from actually hearing it live. Some things viewers are just not supposed to see...
Also, I was clicking around my television Saturday morning and turned to NBC's HD channel. I thought I would just see an HD version of the "Today" show, but instead some groggy-eyed producer put the studio feed on the air, so I watched an anchorwoman practicing her script and talking to producers about pronunciations and camera angles. I have never seen the network news make a blunder like that. After watching the anchor stumble through the copy three times, it kind of took away from actually hearing it live. Some things viewers are just not supposed to see...
6.28.2007
Bad Headline:
"China officials live without air-cons for a day"
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSPEK15661420070613?feedType=RSS
I didn't like this headline because of the "air-cons". This article talks about how the Chinese government cut off air conditioning for some government employees to save a little bit of energy. When I first saw the headline, for some reason, I thought of that Nicolas Cage movie, "Con Air". I honestly thought the article was about some Chinese military exercise. To me, the headling is a little misleading. Instead of using air-cons, I think that just using "AC" would have been acceptable or maybe even "cool air".
Good Headline:
"Will iPhone rock music industry?"
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/ptech/06/27/iphone.mobile.music.ap/index.html
This headline is simple, catchy and a pretty good example of using the SVO structure for a headline but this one is in the form of a question. I like how they used "rock" to ambiguously imply that people who buy the iPhone will bolster the iTunes industry but that the music industry as a whole will suffer because Apple doesn't allow customers to download music directly to the phones.
"China officials live without air-cons for a day"
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSPEK15661420070613?feedType=RSS
I didn't like this headline because of the "air-cons". This article talks about how the Chinese government cut off air conditioning for some government employees to save a little bit of energy. When I first saw the headline, for some reason, I thought of that Nicolas Cage movie, "Con Air". I honestly thought the article was about some Chinese military exercise. To me, the headling is a little misleading. Instead of using air-cons, I think that just using "AC" would have been acceptable or maybe even "cool air".
Good Headline:
"Will iPhone rock music industry?"
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/ptech/06/27/iphone.mobile.music.ap/index.html
This headline is simple, catchy and a pretty good example of using the SVO structure for a headline but this one is in the form of a question. I like how they used "rock" to ambiguously imply that people who buy the iPhone will bolster the iTunes industry but that the music industry as a whole will suffer because Apple doesn't allow customers to download music directly to the phones.
6.27.2007
Headlines, good and bad
A good headline:
“iPhone May Not Rock Music Industry”
http://news.wjla.com/news/stories/0607/434546.html
6.26.2007
good/bad headlines
Good headline: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/bal-taxes0626,0,2838871.story?coll=bal-home-headlines
Leaders differ on budget fix
I think this iheadline from today's Baltimore Sun is a good, strong headline because it is short and concise and the reader knows exactly what they are going to get. It also follows the structure of a good headline which we discussed in class: subject verb object. Here the subject, leaders, preceeds the noun, differ which preceeds the object, the budget fix. The headline reads easily and appears to fit into the appropriate size for professsional headlines.
Bad headline: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062501763.html
Pension For Police Appointee Debated
This headline from today's Washington Post is not good because the verb is not only at the end of the sentence, but it is in past tense. As we learned today, headlines should be in present tense. This headline does not follow the subject, verb, object structure because the object is the first word which is followed by the subject, which is followed by the past tense verb. It does not mislead the readers but I think it could be written much stronger for a paper such as the Post.
Leaders differ on budget fix
I think this iheadline from today's Baltimore Sun is a good, strong headline because it is short and concise and the reader knows exactly what they are going to get. It also follows the structure of a good headline which we discussed in class: subject verb object. Here the subject, leaders, preceeds the noun, differ which preceeds the object, the budget fix. The headline reads easily and appears to fit into the appropriate size for professsional headlines.
Bad headline: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062501763.html
Pension For Police Appointee Debated
This headline from today's Washington Post is not good because the verb is not only at the end of the sentence, but it is in past tense. As we learned today, headlines should be in present tense. This headline does not follow the subject, verb, object structure because the object is the first word which is followed by the subject, which is followed by the past tense verb. It does not mislead the readers but I think it could be written much stronger for a paper such as the Post.
Good and Bad Headlines
Sharon Choi
Bad headline: Hospital Board Refuses To Resign
Article link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062501889.html
This headline is from an article in the Metro section of today's Post. My initial reaction to this headline was, 'Board refuses to resign?' Obviously, the article is not going to be about a physical board, perhaps wooden, that refuses to resign. In order to prevent this kind of confusion, the headline should have used something like 'board of directors.' A more specific subject would have cleared up any confusions in the headline.
Good headline: Attacker Kills 4 Sunni Sheiks Who Aided U.S.
Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/world/middleeast/26iraq.html
This headline is from an article in the World section of the New York Times. I like this one because it is summarizes the article with a simple subject-verb-object format. There are no words or phrases that may confuse readers. It is very straightforward with what it wants to say.
Bad headline: Hospital Board Refuses To Resign
Article link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062501889.html
This headline is from an article in the Metro section of today's Post. My initial reaction to this headline was, 'Board refuses to resign?' Obviously, the article is not going to be about a physical board, perhaps wooden, that refuses to resign. In order to prevent this kind of confusion, the headline should have used something like 'board of directors.' A more specific subject would have cleared up any confusions in the headline.
Good headline: Attacker Kills 4 Sunni Sheiks Who Aided U.S.
Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/world/middleeast/26iraq.html
This headline is from an article in the World section of the New York Times. I like this one because it is summarizes the article with a simple subject-verb-object format. There are no words or phrases that may confuse readers. It is very straightforward with what it wants to say.
Good & Bad Headlines
A. Bad headline: "Shaq attacks fat"
I found this on the home page of www.washingtonpost.com in the television section. Although the full story (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/19/AR2007061901498.html?hpid=features1&hpv=national) has a different (better) headline, this headline is more impotant because it helps determine whether readers click through to the story.
I assume that editors at the Washington Post were looking for something short and catchy. "Shaq attacks fat" is both, but it doesn't really make sense. What does it even mean for someone to attack fat? Is he perhaps verbally attacking fat? (But what else? Supporting fat? This reminds me of the "dry wood best for burning" headline.) The headline is also too vague. Whose fat is Shaq attacking? His own? Someone else's?
Another bad headline: "Court Rules for Cleaners In $54 Million Pants Suit"
This is in the metro section on www.washingtonpost.com. This headline caught my eye becuse it has the same "suit problem" as one of the headlines we talked about in class. This has become a big enough story that many (if not most) people would immediately understand the headline, but there is still the risk that readers would confuse "suit" for clothing instead of a legal case-- or at least a risk of slowing the reader down, which you always want to avoid, especially online.
See the full story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062500443.html?nav=hcmodule.
B. Good headline: "Deputy Mayor Robbed at Gunpoint"
This headline is also from www.washingtonpost.com's metro section. This is an effective headline because it is immediately understandable and attention-grabbing. The headline is appropriate for the tone and content of the story; it doesn't use any cute phrases. Instead, it is to-the-point and informative.
It is important that the headline refers to the deputy mayor by his title rather than his name since it is reasonable to assume that the majority of readers have not heard of Victor Reinoso. The use of the word "gunpoint" is also effectice because of the image it conjures up. It gives the headline a dramatic edge without going overboard.
See the full story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/26/AR2007062600732.html?nav=hcmoduletmv.
I found this on the home page of www.washingtonpost.com in the television section. Although the full story (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/19/AR2007061901498.html?hpid=features1&hpv=national) has a different (better) headline, this headline is more impotant because it helps determine whether readers click through to the story.
I assume that editors at the Washington Post were looking for something short and catchy. "Shaq attacks fat" is both, but it doesn't really make sense. What does it even mean for someone to attack fat? Is he perhaps verbally attacking fat? (But what else? Supporting fat? This reminds me of the "dry wood best for burning" headline.) The headline is also too vague. Whose fat is Shaq attacking? His own? Someone else's?
Another bad headline: "Court Rules for Cleaners In $54 Million Pants Suit"
This is in the metro section on www.washingtonpost.com. This headline caught my eye becuse it has the same "suit problem" as one of the headlines we talked about in class. This has become a big enough story that many (if not most) people would immediately understand the headline, but there is still the risk that readers would confuse "suit" for clothing instead of a legal case-- or at least a risk of slowing the reader down, which you always want to avoid, especially online.
See the full story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062500443.html?nav=hcmodule.
B. Good headline: "Deputy Mayor Robbed at Gunpoint"
This headline is also from www.washingtonpost.com's metro section. This is an effective headline because it is immediately understandable and attention-grabbing. The headline is appropriate for the tone and content of the story; it doesn't use any cute phrases. Instead, it is to-the-point and informative.
It is important that the headline refers to the deputy mayor by his title rather than his name since it is reasonable to assume that the majority of readers have not heard of Victor Reinoso. The use of the word "gunpoint" is also effectice because of the image it conjures up. It gives the headline a dramatic edge without going overboard.
See the full story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/26/AR2007062600732.html?nav=hcmoduletmv.
Good/Bad Headline
The Good.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/26/AR2007062600169.html?hpid%3Dmoreheadlines&sub=AR
Hilton Out of Jail, Back in the Big House
This headline is classic. It is a great play on words and addresses a not so serious subject with a not so serious headline. If a major news source like The Post is going to cover a story like Paris Hilton on their home page, then they have to make it catchy.
The Bad.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286698,00.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/26/AR2007062600169.html?hpid%3Dmoreheadlines&sub=AR
Hilton Out of Jail, Back in the Big House
This headline is classic. It is a great play on words and addresses a not so serious subject with a not so serious headline. If a major news source like The Post is going to cover a story like Paris Hilton on their home page, then they have to make it catchy.
The Bad.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286698,00.html
Man Accused of Murdering Jessie Davis Called Another Woman the Night She Was Last Heard From.
This headline is confusing. Without prior knowledge of the story, a reader would be seriously confused. The pronoun "she" could apply to Jessie Davis or another woman. Also, the headline ends in a preposition, which is grammatically tacky. The headline is also too long, which adds to the confusion.Good/Bad Headlines
Brian Katkin
6/26/07
Harvey
Good Headline
Three Hours at a Big Fat Kashmiri Wedding
Chaos, Calm and Copious Cuisine
By Emily Wax
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, June 24, 2007; Page A14
This headline was found in the Washington Post on Sunday, June 24, 2007 in the newspaper's main news section. In my opinion, I thought this headline was catchy. It plays off the movie, My Big Fat Greek Wedding. The article details a wedding in India, during Kashmir's wedding season. Due to some of the similarities between the movie and the description of the wedding in this article, I think the headline is appropriate and uses popular culture to bring in readers. The mood of the article is light, therefore, I think it is OK to use a playful headline.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/23/AR2007062301277.html
Bad Headline
Some Details Are Presented By Prosecution
By Sandhya Somashekhar
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 26, 2007; Page B02
This headline was found in the Washington Post on Tuesday, June 26, 2007 in the newspaper's Metro section. In my opinion, this headline is very vague and ambiguous. What does it mean that "some" details have been presented by the prosecution? I think because the editor downplayed the importance of the details that the prosecution presented, readers may glance over the story because they may think, "If the type of details were not even important enough to go in the headline, then why should I read the entire story?" A better headline might read "Misfilings About Donations, Dates Among Details Presented By Prosecution." This headline would better inform the reader what the article is really about.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062501681.html
6/26/07
Harvey
Good Headline
Three Hours at a Big Fat Kashmiri Wedding
Chaos, Calm and Copious Cuisine
By Emily Wax
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, June 24, 2007; Page A14
This headline was found in the Washington Post on Sunday, June 24, 2007 in the newspaper's main news section. In my opinion, I thought this headline was catchy. It plays off the movie, My Big Fat Greek Wedding. The article details a wedding in India, during Kashmir's wedding season. Due to some of the similarities between the movie and the description of the wedding in this article, I think the headline is appropriate and uses popular culture to bring in readers. The mood of the article is light, therefore, I think it is OK to use a playful headline.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/23/AR2007062301277.html
Bad Headline
Some Details Are Presented By Prosecution
By Sandhya Somashekhar
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 26, 2007; Page B02
This headline was found in the Washington Post on Tuesday, June 26, 2007 in the newspaper's Metro section. In my opinion, this headline is very vague and ambiguous. What does it mean that "some" details have been presented by the prosecution? I think because the editor downplayed the importance of the details that the prosecution presented, readers may glance over the story because they may think, "If the type of details were not even important enough to go in the headline, then why should I read the entire story?" A better headline might read "Misfilings About Donations, Dates Among Details Presented By Prosecution." This headline would better inform the reader what the article is really about.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/25/AR2007062501681.html
Good vs. Bad News Headlines
Good News Headline
A 'Hole' Lot of Traffic Tie-Ups
By Adam Leech
http://www.seacoastonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070622/NEWS/706220469
I like this headline a lot since the word 'hole' is a play-on-word that takes on double-meaning. It can refer to the 'hole' which it is literally discussing the big hole that is in the middle of the street causing traffic mayhem. Though, if you read the title out loud, one may interpret the situation as a 'whole' lot of problem, referring to the vastness and enormity of the problem. Regardless of which meaning you take on, it makes sense; the overall use of the word is quite witty. It is grammar error free. It is also brief and concise, and it can stand alone without confusing the readers.
Bad News Headline
Excerpt: 'Why Smart Men Marry Smart Women'
Dr. Christine B. Whelan Proves That Intelligent Women Can Find a Husband and Happiness
http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Books/Story?id=2569852&page=2
I find this headline to be quite obvious to the average reader. Nothing really captures the attention of the audience or motivates them to read further; it's just too simple and quite frankly, very boring and perhaps stupid. I'm also surprised that this news story comes from ABC News, which is a prominent news organization. I've read better headlines and expected more from ABC News.
Critiquing News Site Headlines
Please find a good and not-so-adept headline on one or more news Web sites (English-language only, please), and diplomatically explain the pros and cons of each, based on points discussed in class. Please list both the URL and the headline for each, along with some explanation.
6.22.2007
Since the e-mails on our resumes will be viewable to anybody in the world, it's a good idea to protect them from spammers that prowl the Web. In the code to hyperlink your e-mail, replace the @ symbol with & # 6 4 ; instead, but without the spaces. If I post the code without spaces then it will still show up as a @.
You can find this information here: http://www.web-source.net/html_protect_email.htm
You can find this information here: http://www.web-source.net/html_protect_email.htm
6.21.2007
This post on LiveJournal is a great example of the power of the citizen journalist.
http://bookshop.livejournal.com/834653.html
Warning: There are graphic descriptions of violence.
This is an article on the subject in an alternative newspaper that covered the story: http://bloomingtonalternative.com/articles/2007/06/06/8379. The blogger links to this article. It is not as graphic.
http://bookshop.livejournal.com/834653.html
Warning: There are graphic descriptions of violence.
This is an article on the subject in an alternative newspaper that covered the story: http://bloomingtonalternative.com/articles/2007/06/06/8379. The blogger links to this article. It is not as graphic.
6.06.2007
Welcome Summer Class!
Over the next six weeks, we'll use this blog as a virtual meeting place for discussions about interesting facets of news Web sites, photos, headlines and more.
I'm looking forward to your thoughtful posts.
I'm looking forward to your thoughtful posts.
4.04.2007
Headlines
From the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
Love Shack challenges Johns Creek
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/northfulton/stories/2007/04/02/0402loveshack.html
If you didn't know that Love Shack is an adult novelty store and John's Creek is an Atlanta suburb, you'd think this was some kind of softball rematch.
From the LA Times:
Parents stand up and cheer as a $15 sneaker enters the game
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-sneakers4apr04,0,3778454.story?coll=la-home-nation
This is a story about an NBA player who, like many others has his own line of shoes, but unlike others', his shoes are priced at about $15. The shoe's popularity seems to be defying the "snob appeal" that expensive shoes seems to have.
The headline is intriguing if you're not familiar with the story. It employs a clever metaphor for a familiar image of fans cheering as the players enter the arena at the beginning of each game.
Love Shack challenges Johns Creek
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/northfulton/stories/2007/04/02/0402loveshack.html
If you didn't know that Love Shack is an adult novelty store and John's Creek is an Atlanta suburb, you'd think this was some kind of softball rematch.
From the LA Times:
Parents stand up and cheer as a $15 sneaker enters the game
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-sneakers4apr04,0,3778454.story?coll=la-home-nation
This is a story about an NBA player who, like many others has his own line of shoes, but unlike others', his shoes are priced at about $15. The shoe's popularity seems to be defying the "snob appeal" that expensive shoes seems to have.
The headline is intriguing if you're not familiar with the story. It employs a clever metaphor for a familiar image of fans cheering as the players enter the arena at the beginning of each game.
Heds - one good, one not so adept.
Good - "Cline takes on thug cops" It uses active voice, identifies someone who's recognizable locally (the police superintendent, I think) and the phrase "thug cops," while normally unacceptable in a hed, is justified when you're talking about a burly police officer repeatedly punching a 115-pound woman.
Not so adept - "Google makes a 'hiss' terical search", a story about a large snake loose in Google's headquarters.
The hed tells me it's snake-related, but the concept of a snake loose in Google's office is so promising, I would've liked to see something more creative. Plus, the search wasn't hysterical, unless they were freaking out as it happened - plausible considering the snake is three feet long.
"Latest Google search: A python in the office" was CNNMoney's hed, and that makes me much happier.
It's a light story with no huge import, and the underlying premise is amusing - the perfect time to have some fun with the hed.
Not so adept - "Google makes a 'hiss' terical search", a story about a large snake loose in Google's headquarters.
The hed tells me it's snake-related, but the concept of a snake loose in Google's office is so promising, I would've liked to see something more creative. Plus, the search wasn't hysterical, unless they were freaking out as it happened - plausible considering the snake is three feet long.
"Latest Google search: A python in the office" was CNNMoney's hed, and that makes me much happier.
It's a light story with no huge import, and the underlying premise is amusing - the perfect time to have some fun with the hed.
Raechal's headlines
Good headline example: Coup that is Oprah has Howard gushing
Yes, whoever who wrote this April 3 WashingtonPost.com headline broke the rule that writers should use active voice in headlines. That said, they also managed to pack news (Oprah is doing something for Howard), its effect (everyone at Howard is excited) and context (getting Oprah involved is a coup) into a seven-word slug. The story folows the headline’s fun, conversational tone, and the two elements mesh well. My only criticism is that the headline fails to let readers know just how Oprah is involved at Howard. The story and the subhead that is displayed under the headline explains that she’s their scheduled graduation speaker.
Bad headline example: Edwards has more treatable type of cancer
This April 4 USAToday.com headline confused me so much that I had to click on the story. Maybe it worked in that way. However, I didn’t think it did a great job of saying anything. The Associated Press story that went with it is a little muddled as well. Apparently, Elizabeth Edwards found out in a doctor’s appointment Friday that her cancer—which her husband, John Edwards, and the media have said is “untreatable”-- is “more likely to be controlled by anti-estrogen drugs.” Huh? I wondered if the reporter and the headline writer were trying to write around saying that their earlier reporting may not have been accurate. Also, most of the story is about what kind of life expcetancy Edwards has and how she is vowing to fight regardless of how long doctors project she will live. Was the headline writer confused by the story too?
Yes, whoever who wrote this April 3 WashingtonPost.com headline broke the rule that writers should use active voice in headlines. That said, they also managed to pack news (Oprah is doing something for Howard), its effect (everyone at Howard is excited) and context (getting Oprah involved is a coup) into a seven-word slug. The story folows the headline’s fun, conversational tone, and the two elements mesh well. My only criticism is that the headline fails to let readers know just how Oprah is involved at Howard. The story and the subhead that is displayed under the headline explains that she’s their scheduled graduation speaker.
Bad headline example: Edwards has more treatable type of cancer
This April 4 USAToday.com headline confused me so much that I had to click on the story. Maybe it worked in that way. However, I didn’t think it did a great job of saying anything. The Associated Press story that went with it is a little muddled as well. Apparently, Elizabeth Edwards found out in a doctor’s appointment Friday that her cancer—which her husband, John Edwards, and the media have said is “untreatable”-- is “more likely to be controlled by anti-estrogen drugs.” Huh? I wondered if the reporter and the headline writer were trying to write around saying that their earlier reporting may not have been accurate. Also, most of the story is about what kind of life expcetancy Edwards has and how she is vowing to fight regardless of how long doctors project she will live. Was the headline writer confused by the story too?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
