Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journalism. Show all posts

14.6.12

A mediocre finale.

It’s been a varied semester, not just academically but also personally (don’t worry; I’m not initiating a deep-and-meaningful), and this is my final blog post. They grow up so quickly!

Turning eighteen yesterday, I feel I should bring a mature edge to my last post.

As if!

The best moments of JOUR1111 semester were, no doubt, realizing that my lecture friend arranged his jellybeans in the same manner I did, laughing just a bit too hard at crude advertisements, making more Pokémon doodles than lecture notes, and finally being able to just whine for a few pages and have it considered an excellent factual story.

After just one semester, different kids are already showing off what they’ve learned. The science students will tell you everything you didn’t want to know about your lunch, and the law students will tell you about every single piece of legislature they know of (brace yourselves). So what’s my by-product of being a journerd?

While I don’t always say it, I’m secretly judging people know when they talk about a news issue. I’m tempted to blurt out that they’re only thinking that because the media’s told them to, but generally people don’t appreciate being told they’re silly. And after the rap some of my law friends get, I don’t want to be one of those know-it-all students, so I generally just sit there looking a bit mischievous.

So this brings me to the end of my JOUR1111 course and blog. While overall it seems that the resounding message seems to be “you’re studying a degree for a dying trade, congrats!”, and my friends frequently tell me I’m in a dumb course and won’t get anything out of it (pretentious law chumps), I think it’s that underlying urge to just write that keeps us all going, much like this post. Hopefully we’ll all get there, or at least find some spiffy stories trying.

16.5.12

Suspicion is on my agenda.

In our JOUR1111 lecture this week the idea that we were being told exactly what we like and what's good to like in the media was simply reinforced. In a bleak turn of events, I found out about agenda settings in journalism.

Reality bites. But these bites are socially constructed and mediated through shared language. That is, we simply perceive these bites! Very deep.

There are a few agendas in journalism. There's public agenda - what we, the public, perceive as important (keeping in mind this is also dictated for us). Then there's policy agenda, which the decision makers reckon are important, and corporate agenda, and finally media agenda. In a tangle of perception versus reality, these four agendas are interrelated.

Media isn't just (badly) reporting reality, they're also shaping and filtering it. Cheeky bastards.

In 1922 Walter Lippman proposed a theory - that public opinion is formulated from the creation of images of events in our mind. Propaganda and the power of images substitute on social pattern for another and we end up relying on images as opposed to critical thinking. Remember that birthday party you thought was awesome, with memories of fun slides and cake? But no one reminds you of how the bee stung you! That's how the media injects direct influence to set the agenda.

Agendas can manifest themselves in various forms. Media gate-cutting describes how individuals themselves control the flow of messages through a communication channel to expose it, and even these issues are often (surprise surprise) chosen by the media.

Agenda cutting is quite crafty, and not the awesome kind involving pipe cleaners and Clag. Not even close. While the media can't just blatantly lie (we assume), most of the truth isn't represented. Less coverage means that an issue is less cared about, which is the Beibs' claim to fame.

Then there's agenda surfing - the bandwagon effect. Personally I don't like wagons, but apparently existing public opinions do influence others towards that opinion. I still don't like wagons.

While media dependence can often mean an individual is more easily influenced, I'm stubborn enough that even my hours on Facebook and Twitter mean I'm always scoffing at what the news has to say.

So while my agenda involves cleaning my room, shopping for party supplies and redecorating my wall, media's agenda involves sneakily nudging you toward a certain opinion, quietly enough that you think it's your own.

So if you think my humour's tacky, you're being fooled. The world just WANTS you to think it's poor when really I'm a literary genius. Good day.

15.5.12

My thrifty grandma would be shocked at such bad value.

My JOUR1111 lecture this week was of great value. Great news values, that is!

News values are the degree of prominence given to a story and the resulting attention given by the audience, and are often dictated and elected by media organisations. You don't really think sports and celebrities are interesting! It's all brainwashing! Unless that's what they want us to think....

Anyway, there are more news values and ways of organising them than you can poke an aerial at. Everything comes down to newsworthiness.

These values are even different across different services, countries and cultures. While the phrase, "if it bleeds, it leads" is true for some media outlets, with lead stories tending to be tragedies, TV channels like Ten and 9 take on the "if it's local, it leads" approach.

Harold Evans, editor of the Sunday Times from 1967 to 1981, stated in 2000 that editors are the 'human sieves' of torrent news. They ultimately determine the news values and what is newsworthy.

Drama, visual attractiveness, entertainment, brevity and other values are examples of such factors valued by different media. In 1996, Masterson came up with his own little dandy list:

1. Significance
2. Proximity
3. Conflict
4. Human interest
5. Novelty
6. Prominence

Seems fair enough? Duh-duh. In 2002 Macgregor reckoned he could top that and concocted another:

1. Visualness
2. Conflict
3. Emotion
4. Celebrification of the journalist

So which is right? THERE IS NO RIGHT ANSWER. How unfair is that? It's really got me worried for the Journalism Quiz.

And yet with all these values in place, newsworthiness is under threat more than ever. Journalism and the commercialization of media and social life, journalism and PR and the difference between ideals and reality of news reporting all jeopardise quality journalism. PR influence causes tabloidisation and lazy incompetent journalism. Then as the media apocalypse reaches its worst, hyper-commercialization sets in and as I've previously prophesised, we all get crap news.

So what actually drives the decisions made in media organisations about what is newsworthy? The audience is not just the audience any more. We're the distributors too and there's a new balance of power.

So let us join hands the cease this decline of journalism! If people from all over the world stand on a giant globe, join hands and sing, maybe things will miraculously get better. That's what we've been told before so it must be true and important.

When bananas aren't good taste.

I live my life by three strict rules:

1. Always wear a watch,
2. If it’s unreasonably stressful, avoid it, and
3. You CAN resist the chocolate slice.

In a totally unrelated matter thanks to a terrible segue, journalism and its behavior can be dictated by three ethical theories.

But first, to distinguish between ethics and taste. In my JOUR1111 lecture this week we were asked and often confuzzled about the difference, so I’ll put it simply.

In an advertising context, bad ethics is about making an ad that criticizes a certain demographic, be it race, gender, culture and so on. Bad taste is more about making an ad for fruit that, while encouraging you to get your daily two and five, closely resembles the male… anatomy. But it’s not an ethical issue to be advertising bananas and plums.

Now, these three theories are as follows:

1. Deontology,
2. Consequentialism (a.k.a. Teleology) and
3. Virtue.
Any ethical theory you can devise, no matter how broad or specific, will fit into one of these categories. Neat!

Deontology, personally, reminds me of dentistry. Firstly, the words look pretty similar and deontology sounds rather professional and toothy. There are other similarities, though, that my absent mind has managed to detect!

Tooth care’s pretty basic. Brush, rinse, floss, avoid sugar, and see your dentist. Follow these rules, you’ll do the right thing and have lovely pearly whites. Deontology is the same. It incorporates the rules, principles and duties of journalism, and as such all ethics codes. Do the right thing, to do the right thing.

Well there, I got to the point. No matter how many puns, analogies and bad images I conjured up along the way, I got the ‘right’ outcome. That’s how consequentialism operates. Never mind how we got there; the end may justify the means. Although nothing justifies my tacky 13-year-old-boy humour.

Maybe my courage is what matters – I’m brave enough to crack these jokes, and that in itself is a good habit of character. A virtue. Virtues are, according to the virtue theory, good habits that form the ‘golden mean’ of behavior and, as a result, ethical journalism.

As Neil from the Inbetweeners philosophised, “I’ve got effics,” and considering he’d find male genetalia made from fruit funny, it can’t be poor ethics.

18.4.12

Feeling numb, numb, nu-nu-nu-numb?

Most people enjoy talking about themselves. To a person, their own name is the single sweetest word in the English language. I think that’s why I can sit down and churn out page after page of my own ‘factual story’, also known as a depressive look into my life, with a tackily humorous twist.

While I like the 90s for what they saw – Angry Beavers, Polly Pockets and reenacting A Bug’s Life with a few decorative rocks and some guinea pig seed – I think deep down, I’m fond of them because they were the most relaxing, carefree days of my life. And while everyone says that, it’s a bit extreme in my case, as my mind doesn’t allow me much down time between stressing about everything and concocting some fun new voices for me to hear.

Maybe again why I like grunge blogs. While they don’t promote mental illness, they don’t shun it. If you were to tell the owner of a Tumblr filled with orange tween girls with vans what you’ve hallucinated about, they’d probably cry. But not the grunge kids. We take what we’ve experienced, type it in a goopy font, and whack it on a pastel background for the world to take in. No nonsense, take it or leave it. WE R WHO WE R.


 Preach it, sista


 
And while Ke$ha’s catchy hit may seem similar to Lady Gaga’s Born This Way, people with mental illnesses often aren’t born with it. It’s their environments and stressors and the people they deal with. While there’s a slightly increased risk of developing depression or anxiety if your parents had it, you’re not ‘born that way’. After all, Ke$ha used to be fat.


Eat it, sista


I think it’s worthwhile taking the time to release your inner journo and write a factual story about yourself if you haven’t. Not a whingefest, just an anecdote. In my case, the added bonus of releasing my inner turmoil (terribly dramatic) was that I completed an assignment over a week early. There’s a first for everything!

29.3.12

Media Use Diary and Analysis.


Old media VS new media
You can’t teach an old dog new tricks… but you can tweet about it

Old media has a few aliases. Legacy media, traditional media, and heritage media – all of them refer to the mass communication techniques that have existed since the first newspaper, which was published in 59 B.C. in Rome (the first printed newspaper was published in 1605, but B.C. sounds more impressive so let’s go with that). This industry comprises television, radio, film and music (studio), newspapers, magazines and books.

Then we move onto a sort of transitional phase, of Web 1.0 – the Information Web. Basically, Web 1.0 is old media but just on the computer, as media in the form of ‘brochure-ware’ is repurposed for the web. The focus for the Information Web is on companies, as it is very advertising friendly.

New media is most frequently used today. Web 2.0 is the Social Web and is brimming with new media. Facebook, Skype, Twitter are all part of a group of digital technologies that are easily manipulated, networkable, and interactive. Digital interactivity is the key here and the focus is shifted to social groups and ‘prod-users’ (Alex Bruns, 2005). Web 3.0 is, in a sense, the ‘new new’ media, but I will be examining basic old media and new media for the purpose of my analysis.


The link below leads to my personal Media Use Diary over a 10-day period, divided into old and new media, and then various specific outlets within those. Some basic assumptions when reading the entries are as follows:

  • The term use defines an instance in where I am actively involved in a media form, as opposed to exposure. During the course of each day it can be assumed I was exposed to various different media forms (e.g. radio, television, text, etc. through background music, advertising etc.) and these have not been accounted for.
  • Each 'day' refers to the period between when I wake up and when I go to sleep, and is not based on a 24-hour period. For example, one 'day' may span between 10a.m. in the morning and 1.00 a.m. that night depending on when I am active.
  • I have often accessed multiple forms of media simultaneously, for example listening to music or watching television whilst using the internet. In these cases, the time spent has been used for each individual category. That is, if I spent one hour on Facebook while listening to music, one hour would be allocated to both the 'Facebook' and 'iPod' column.
  • I have not distinguished between time spent using media for leisure or for academic use except when mentioned in annotations. It can be assumed, however, that use of newspapers, Blogger and specific websites listed are for studying purposes.
  • Annotations in TV entries depict the genre of program watched for analytical reasons, as do locations in iPod and radio entries.
  •  A greyed-out entry signifies no use for that day.

My media use diary can be found by clicking HERE.


Something has happened!
Taking a peek at what we’ve actually been doing all this time

To effectively decipher what my media use and that of my peers indicates, I will explain what the graphs show, why these results have occurred, and any personal patterns that are evident.


NEW MEDIA

What?
The shiny blue gradient says it all – I spent over three quarters of my time accessing media on new media (online and electronic). This amount is actually less than I predicted it would be, as my use of newspapers, books, radio and television is more of an occasional practice than a strict pattern like my internet use. I use Facebook and Tumblr virtually every day, as can be seen in my media diary. My use of magazines and newspapers especially, however, is scattered in the table, although the ‘Dazed & Confused’ column shows a slight pattern – the length of time between my purchase of the publication, and completion of reading. New media is ongoing and infinite, as I can hop onto Facebook every single night and be guaranteed of hilarious(ish) updates from friends, news from pages I’ve ‘liked’ and even just communication.

Why?
Personally, I don’t possess much interest in news or current affairs, and so my reasons for picking up a newspaper are limited unless I happen to feel like seeing what’s happening. If I desire news, I am more likely to obtain it from Facebook or a quick Google search, or simply asking my family and friends.

Additionally, I’ve have a solid habit of accessing Facebook and Tumblr, and other new media forms on a frequent basis. As well as taking up time that could be used on old media, I favour new media for both informative and entertainment purposes. All these reasons result in a nice chunk of blue wedge that makes me very hip, trendy, and up-to-the-minute, if not slightly uneducated.

Patterns:
In my media use diary, it’s pretty clear how I favour new media. My use of old media is scattered and unpredictable, and usually just depends on what I feel like at the time. Conversely, my use of new media is daily and often constant, and I spend, on average, over six hours per day indulging in it.




What?
Finally, my excessive online use reveals itself. While most of my peers spend 2-4 hours online per day, I am part of less than 5% of us who sit on the blagoblag for five to six hours (as indicated by the red text), at an average of 5.1 hours per day. If only I resisted the urge to check my newsfeed, I could have dropped down to the lovely purple wedge and been a little less ashamed. Considering over 77% of my media use is new media and of that mostly online, it’s a little comforting… maybe everyone else is simply drooling over the ham radio for 5 hours a day.

Why?
The reason everyone is accessing the internet for at least one a day is as simple as the Web 2.0 phenomenon. If we don’t log on for at least a short amount of time, we feel disconnected and cut off from our social groups and in essence the world. While some people don’t even have Facebook and are using the internet solely for studying, it’s still a vital part of our everyday lives and a mere 3.2% of JOUR1111 students go without at least an hour per day. 3.6% require (or desire) over six hours, and the observation that more people are extreme internet users than limited internet uses reinforces my notion that we all love to connect online.

Patterns:
While the only pattern we can assume from the survey results is that most of the students connect for a few hours, my media diary reveals more detailed patterns of my own. It can be noted that nearly every day I access Facebook, Tumblr and some mode of personal finance. In the course of a note, you can deduct that I check my Facebook, do a bit of tumbling and check and work on my money. About every second day I use Blogger for uni, and this simply comes down to the fact that I don’t have something valuable to blog about every day.



What?
Of all those who completed the survey, it’s as obvious as a fish slapping your face that Facebook’s a hit. General surfing and browsing, emailing and study also ranked up, and I’m a bit taken aback that only 10% of JOUR1111 students are avid tweeters.

Why?
While previously I assumed that some people must be studying for hours a day to result in such high levels of internet use survey-wide, I am corrected. Nearly 92% of JOUR1111 students spend most of their time on Facebook, which is handy because we can all have a chat online about how we should be studying. General surfing and browsing is a popular pastime of prod-users, and the significant emailing figure can again be attributed to Web 2.0’s introduction of frequent online communication. As a lot of study is only possible, and sometimes just easier, online, this explains why almost half of those surveyed recurrently use the internet for studying purposes.

Patterns:
Although the sites I access vary slightly from day to day, I roughly use the same sites every day and for around the same lengths of time. This comes down to my habitual relationship with journalism and communication media, which will be fully explained later.



What?
For once, I’m part of the in-crowd, as I too consider Facebook as my second home like the other 91.9% of my peers. I’m not a huge downloader at all, as reflected in the empty columns for streaming and downloading activities. Only 5.6% of those surveyed played LAN games, so again I’m in the majority with those that don’t (I prefer my gaming handheld and 90s’esque, hello Simpsons Road Rage on GBA). I bank a little, shop a little, and study a little, and these activities aren’t hugely frequent among my peers either. Although I’m only online for study purposes 5.5% of the time, I’m only studying part-time too, so don’t you judge me.

Why?
Firstly, my nonexistent downloading and streaming results can be attributed to my personal preference. I simply prefer to watch DVDs that I own or listen to music already on my iPod (I’m lazy and also have an incredibly shoddy internet connection at home).

I don’t really feel inclined to create a Skype, as, not surprisingly, I just turn to Facebook or sometimes phone calls to connect with friends near and far. My peers use email about half as much as they’re on Facebook, while I use it significantly less as clearly evident on the above graph. This is because I can frequently check all of my accounts on my phone or while I’m at home, and I do, because of my craving to be constantly connected to everything and everyone. Similarly, I don’t ever have a general browse of the internet, because I know exactly what I want to do when I log in – obviously Facebook, perusing blogs, and just maybe a bit of study.

Patterns:
The above graph illustrates the typical online use for me on any given day. Although taken from averages, by referring to my media use diary you can see that I always spend a great deal of time on Facebook, quite a bit on Tumblr, a bit on Blogger for study, and Twitter in short bursts.




 What?
The results from the peer media survey showed that the great majority of students didn't have a single Twitter when answering the survey. I lay in the 1.8% minority (as indicated by the red text) that had 2 Twitter accounts, although this isn't to say I spent more time than them using the outlet. By viewing my personal media use diary, it can be seen that I only accessed Twitter twice over the 10-day period, and the most time I spent in one day tweeting was 15 minutes, which is a very insignificant amount of my time spent online.

Why?
I have a personal Twitter as well as my university Twitter. As there is a notable chunk for the 1 account sector, it may be assumed that respondents were referring to a single personal Twitter and excluding their new uni Twitter (for personal reasons or because they hadn’t yet created it). In opposition, they may have only had their uni Twitter and recorded this as owning 1; or (again, if they were yet to create it), they would have selected the 0 option.

Patterns:
To examine Twitter patterns, I will be referring to my own use of Twitter. I only logged on to the site twice in the 10-day period, for 15 minutes and again for 8. I rarely use Twitter, and when I do I don’t find it necessary to spend more than a few minutes on it. This reflects both in the graph of my personal online use and also in that of my peers, suggesting we are all a bit hesitant or easily bored by the platform, or simply don’t need to use it heaps.




What?
Again, I lay in a minority. How individual of me. Most people didn’t have any blogs, 28.9% had one, and I was part of the 9.7% that had two. From my personal media use diary, it can be observed that on average I spend 98.3 minutes online per day on my blogs, and 82.7% of this is my personal Tumblr and only 17.3% on my JOUR1111 blog.

Why?
The same question can be posed as with the Twitter scenario; when answering the survey, did people take into consideration both personal and university blogs, and had they even created the latter? As a substantial 58.6% stated they had no blogs, it can be assumed they were yet to create their JOUR1111 blog. This raises questions about the 1 wedge, though –were the people who said they owned one blog referring to a personal or academic blog? From this chart alone, it is impossible to tell.

Patterns:
I frequently used both of my blogs in a very obvious pattern. I use my Tumblr every single day for 81.3 minutes on average, and my JOUR1111 Blogger for around 17, although I have days off from this blog.





What?
As expected, 89.1% of respondents choose to listen to music through an iPod or similar ‘smart’ device, as do I. A close 74.1% use their computer, and just 42.8% actually use the radio. 27.5% still use CDs which surprises me, and interestingly 6.3% use some other brand of mp3 player.

Why?
Everyone loves Apple. That’s it. The convenience and accessibility of an iPod, iPhone or similar smart phone is quicker, easier and often more fun for users of music media. Both the iPod and Radio wedges may be part of the in-car music access as depicted later on. Online streaming and the ever-popular iTunes can be credited for three quarters of us using our computer to listen to music, and as part of the CD-to-iTunes journey, this sector can be linked with the grey CD sector.

Patterns:
It’s not tricky to tell how and why I like my music by taking a squiz at my media use diary. I listen to my iPod most days and for a decent amount of time, most often whilst commuting. Like the car radio, I use my iPod as a time-filler to entertain myself while travelling, rather than just as a leisure pursuit in my spare time.




OLD MEDIA



What?
Take that excessive media use, I’m finally in a majority that isn’t up the top of the scale. 29.9% of JOUR1111 students are like me, watching around 1-2 hours of TV per day, and generally I favour comedy programming over others, sometimes tuning in to reality shows. 26.9% follow closely behind, watching less than one hour per day.

Why?
It’s interesting to note that most people either watch no TV at all, or at least an hour. It is likely that once they start watching, they watch an entire episode or two that they have specifically planned to watch, rather than just sit down and channel surfing for the night. This is true in my case, as a few patterns are evident in my diary. I watch the same comedy programs for a few nights on GEM, and the same reality program for the next few nights on Channel Ten. Mostly I go to 7 for news, which is my primary news source for when I rarely want it.

Pattern:
There is not a broad pattern to my television viewing, but some patterns occur over time spans of a few days. On Sunday the 18th, I balanced some documentary viewing with the same length of comedy, while I watched GEM for two consecutive days later in the week and TEN for two days also. Another pattern of my television use is that I generally prefer to watch comedies, and occasionally news; the atypical 40 minute figure for Saturday the 24th was the QLD election coverage.




What?
Like 82.9% of respondents, I listen to radio primarily in the car and this can be seen in my media use diary. Interestingly, while the majority of students only access this form of broadcast journalism while travelling, the other means of listening are in roughly the same proportions.  8.3% use their phone, 12.5% stream online from home and 12% favour a digital radio, while 10.2% use god knows what (do they sit inside the radio’s studio? Like seriously, how else do you listen to radio besides a car, phone or an actual radio?! Who has non-digital radios anymore anyway… cavemen).

Why?
Radio, although sustainable, is not a hugely popular form of media. This explains why most of us tend to just turn on the ol’ radio waves while we’re sitting bored in the car, as opposed to curling up at home tuning in for the nightly serials.

Pattern:
I admit it; I’m your common car-listener. It takes me about 25 minutes to be driven to work, and twice I opted for Nova 106.9. Another day on a short 5-minute drive up to the shops, I listened to B105. I don’t have radio favourites, it simply depends on which one’s playing good music and isn’t broadcasting Frank Walker from National Tiiiiiles.






Cue: ‘The Bold and the Beautiful’ theme song
Our terribly dramatic relationships with JAC

It’s all about me:
My relationship with media is a strong and consistent one. There is not a single day that I’m not dependent on some form of media for at least a few hours, whether it’s bludging at home on Facey until 2 a.m. or quickly updating my JOUR1111 blog before getting the scoop on the election. While I am definitely dependent on journalism and communication outlets, they are just as dependent on me; a symbiotic relationship is shaped due to both my consumption and creation of media.

Watching television, listening to radio and reading the newspaper – all old media forms – are limited to being consumers, in most cases (excluding talkback radio and editorials, etc.). But I only access old media 22.5% of the time; the rest of my media use is spent adding comments on Facebook, updating my Twitter with hilarious anecdotes, reblogging all of my favourite images on Tumblr and writing content for this blog that’s not quite side-splitting.

It is difficult to determine the exact ratio between my media consumption and creation, unless I was to log everything I read versus everything I created which is a tad too obsessive, even for me. On the whole, I believe that although I consume a great deal of new media and some old media, I generate enough journalism and communication matter to replenish what I’ve devoured.

And the other 99%?
Although the rest of my peers possess a similar relation to JACS as I do, all of the graphs above, although initially shameful for me, illustrate that there is a slight trend to consume more than create. Most of the students surveyed didn’t have a blog, or a Twitter, so their only new media production outlet was Facebook which acts both as a media provider and accepter.

The general pattern is growing though – that old media, while informative, is tedious and not as interactive as people want. People are more inclined to use new media, even if just for journalism consumption, as there is the option to network and contribute should they fancy to. To receive the quality and speed of media that they want, my peers and society in general yearn to have their say and let the wide world know.

Maybe I’m just ahead of the times (being incredibly hip and jiggy with it as usual). I almost have a daily conversation with media – I add my input to the online conversation that is journalism, and it responds by providing me with output to work with and enjoy. The more others join in, the more there is to share, and the online empire grows as Web 3.0 sneaks in and the focus slowly transfers to individuals.

22.3.12

Skate or die.


Recently my best friend moved to Sydney and is now studying marketing, although she thinks she might swap to publishing. Just perfect, considering I’ll hopefully pop out of uni in a few years time with a Journalism degree and a desire to be published. I’ll write, she'll publish (I’m aware that's not exactly how it works but we'll get there)! Her updates inform me that she's purchased a skateboard to cruise around her new abode with ease, so it seems only fitting that I invest in one too and finally learn how to skate after, roughly, 10 years of intending to. I’ll write my 90s articles on my 90s skateboard, even if it takes until 2090 (I told you some grannies might like grunge).

20.3.12

I'm high on life!



You see a disturbing still from a childhood cartoon. I see a SIGN. When little crazy Tommy popped up on my Tumblr dashboard, some interpretations of his appearance flooded my mind, but ultimately it was the homage to the 90s that prompted me to reblog it. Coincidentally, in my reporting course we were shown a clip of James Brown being interviewed high (I think I'm going to like uni). Although there were no doubts what his indulgences were, this picture leads us to wonder what in god's name Tommy is on. Suddenly, journalism, lectures, and elements of the 90s are linked together. And I didn't even have to try and extrapolate. To you, a disturbing still from a childhood cartoon. To me, confirmation that I'm doing my dream degree.

19.3.12

Shitty coffee, shitty metaphor.

Week 2 – a second dose of UQ, a second attempt at making awkward conversation with strangers, a second chance to mock people buying half-strength skinny cappuccinos (it’s freaking warm skim milk).

In my JOUR1111 lecture this week, we got stuck into web iterations and the effect and challenges of online progression on the news. Mass communication or “old media”, like newspapers, radio and TV, was no match for the bodacious “brochure-ware” of the advertising friendly, company-focused Web 1.0. The Information Web won that round, but when we moved on to the New Media of Web 2.0, my boxing metaphor only continued. Known as the “social web”, platforms like Facebook, Skype and Twitter allow the focus to be shifted to social groups. “Prod-users”, a term coined in 2005 by QUT’s Alex Bruns, were the new content-creaters and reigning champions.

Just when we all thought it couldn’t get any more brutal or complex, out came the notion of Web 3.0 – the “semantic web”. Meta tagging and geotagging packed a punch, resulting in a severe case of hyperlocalisation and specific content delivery for the modern web user.




(Hint: meta tags work heaps  better when zoomed in on at a slight tilt.)


Observing journalists were now concerned about the death of journalism itself, as people felt entitled to news. My lecturer made the call that paywalls are hitting the newspapers, much to the reluctance of new consumers.

I left that lecture feeling a bit battered myself, wondering if there was any point continuing to study a dying trade, and wondering why I can’t just write a normal recount like everyone else.


In my quest for further investigation into paywalls, I found an article by Russell Adams of The Wall Street Journal highlighting the struggle. See 'Newspapers Put Faith in Paywalls' for more.

17.3.12

You red it here first.



This is simply an epitome of the grunge phase. Just as I had wondered if I'd look fetching with bright red hair (don't worry, I won't go there... mum won't let me), I wondered if there'd be some really hardcore grunge kids on campus. I was let down to discovery that people were - SHOCK HORROR - normal?! For a moment, I was disheartened to realise that my target audience for my future career didn't exist, at least not in the confines St. Lucia. But my journalism and reporting lecturers lifted my spirits, as I found out that journalism is being very target-oriented. just as the semantic web is rising, so are my hopes that somewhere out there, people will rush to the news stands to read my interpretations of bright red hair and denim-on-denim.

14.3.12

So hot right meow.

Cats! I discovered a shirt somewhat similar to this in a thrift store a few weeks prior to starting uni. I imagined I’d sport it proudly, and everyone would bask in the wonder that was that girl with the spiffy 90s-bargain-t-shirt-with-the-sleeves-cut-off. Disappointingly, no-one really cared, but at least I didn't distract anyone from discussion of paywalls. With journalism costing several clams, and consumers reluctant to hand them over in return, my writing's going to have to be impeccably professional, entertaining and individual if I’m going to eat in the future. Luckily, I’m in the write place (pun intended).


The daily grind.


Between cavorting around campus thinking I'm the epitome of slick, and sitting hunched on my bed reblogging grainy photos of Kurt Cobain, I make a living by working at a fast food outlet. By a living, I mean I require funds for snazzy new clothes and that delightful flavoured water from the Lolly Shop.

I don't love my work, but I don't hate it either. Between having coins launched at my face (not joking, we get some kooky customers) and fishing jeans out of the toilets (that was a fun shift), I've got a few good friends there and the staff discount is nifty, if not fattening.

Work never did live up to my expectations though. I always thought working in a fast food store would be, well, reminiscent of those in 90s sitcoms, with the buttoned-up shirts, funny hats and cheerful little mascots. Radical, it is not.

"It's an experience," my mother always says. I try to take that on board and think of it as something to write about. Who knows, maybe the coin/face incident could be the catalyst that leads to my dazzling career in journalism. Those hundreds of people that flock in and out of the doors and demand burgers from me every day could be my readers... although it doesn't seem hugely likely that a 70-year-old woman buying 12 soft serve cones for her tiny grandchildren would be interested in grunge music and acid washed muscle tops.

But journalism isn't about assuming, it's about finding out and knowing. Just because it's the official version that she doesn't like dip-dyed hair or black lipstick, that doesn't mean that she's not playing bingo by day, but bleaching her already grey hair and rocking out by night.