Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Creating Chaos

Julia's post about the disruption in her class troubles and puzzles me. What she describes has been reported, to one degree or another, at other universities -- including the so-called elite institutions. I believe I've seen the seeds scattered about here: Students blowing off classes, negotiating with instructors the number of excused absences or reasons for missing exams, appealing for grade changes because they're in danger of being disqualified for scholarships, coming to class hung over and reeking of alcohol, cheating and plagiarizing. What's going on, bloggers? Are we, faculty, too willing to reward the least amount of effort? Do large classes foster slackness? Does the course material lack challenge? Have standards of performance and rules of accountability become so blurred that they've lost their meaning? And when students act out in class, as Julia describes, do you feel robbed?

Professor Wiggins

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Chaos in the Classroom

So this post isn't about anything necessarily tied to J-school, but the appalling nature of students in one of my classes deserves a rant or two.

Our professor was going over the answers to our test we had just taken, so this is one of three or four days during the semester when the lecture hall will actually be filled. While giving the answer to a question, the class began to boo him about the answer. BOO HIM! How can you do that to a professor? And the outburst wasn't from just one unruly kid tucked in the back corner, this was a majority of the class acting out.

The question that received the outburst was about current battleground states for the election. The question was:
The key "battleground" states in this year's presidential election include:
a. New York, California and Florida
b. Colorado, Kansas and Wisconsin
c. Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio
d. Georgia, Alabama and Mississippi

(The answer is C, and the question isn't really relevant to my rant, but I want bloggers to see how ridiculous students are.)

When the professor asked how many students answered A, over 75 percent of the class raised their hand. But, in the professor's defense, since most of the class has a political science or journalism major, they should have known the answer just from keeping up with current events.

When the professor tried to calm the class down, they just kept booing. It was like being stuck in the student section during a Gamecock football game, next to a lot of intoxicated guys, when an official makes a bad call.

Okay, to my rant. So the students in the class should be at least 17 or 18 years old. I'm pretty sure some even want to be future politicians. How can these so called adults treat a professor in such a manner? And this isn't even a professor that students loathe his class, but can't avoid taking the class. This is a wonderful professor who loves "The Daily Show", gives so much extra credit you could fail every test and not fail the class and doesn't take attendance.

Even if the question seemed tricky and students thought they should get credit for it, they should talk to the professor, email, phone, anything would have been more appropriate than booing. I know there are times when we as students get frustrated with tests and professors, but we are not 5, we don't boo them in class for a multiple choice question. I just think that students need to respect their professors, well just learn respect period. Professors deserve better than being booed, a lot better.


P.S. If you haven't spent the colder months in the Coliseum, it is always 20 degrees colder in the dungeon they call a J-school than it is outside. So even though it might be balmy and a nice 70 degrees, it is 50 degrees inside. So bring your coat and gloves and welcome to an early winter.

Sunday, October 24, 2004

H.S. journalism

The American Society of Newspaper Editors has a new site, highschooljournalism.org, devoted to high school journalists and designed to recruit more students into the business. Anyone want to comment on what you see there? Would it have helped you?

There also are resources for teachers.

There's a companion site at which high school newspapers can submit work. The listings are by state, and there's some S.C. work on there.

Print v. Electronic -- Some thoughts

I was just going to add a comment to Tecla's earlier post and to the comment from the concerned high school student, but this is a subject so dear to my heart that I wanted to do a general post so that more people would see it.

First, you must understand that I am Exhibit 1 for crossing media. I started in radio (all-news KYW as summer help and after a short stint in Dayton out of school, moved to WOWO, another 5o kw Westinghouse powerhouse), moved to TV where I was an assignment editor and producer/anchor (and reporter/shooter when needed), then to a newspaper, where I covered environment/transportation/urban affairs and legislative matters, and then to 18 years at AP, where you do print and broadcast. I now blog and code Web pages, do a monthly column for press associations in various states, etc.

So I find this concern often expressed that somehow there is this gulf between print and electronic to be piffle. Those who stick to that belief are looking to become obsolete. Consider that ESPN expects its talent to also be able to contribute to its magazine and Web site, when necessary. CNN expects its talent to be cross-media when required. One large chain I know is preparing to make its broadcast reporters in smaller makets also shoot much more video and file for its Web sites, the latter of which requires print knowledge (by smaller, we're still talking Top 100). The Tribune Co. encourages its print reporters to appear on TV, and they do in greater numbers. During the early days of the Iraq war, at least one Chicago Tribune reporter was doing video phone reports. And scan some of the job ads -- more and more are requiring a commitment to work across media (it is actually being written into some performance reviews).

Now, TV is not print and print is not TV, and the Web is a little of both but its own thing as well. Darn few are going to become Jedi masters of all of this, and they shouldn't. For some further info on this, look at the Lessons from Newsplex series on my Web log, Common Sense Journalism. But shifting among them need not be all that difficult.

Why do I say that? Because for years, the AP hired primarily print people and gave them shifts on the broadcast desk. It still does. If you join the AP, chances are that within the first three months you will pull some shifts on the state broadcast desk. (Probably night shifts.) And for years, I and other news editors and broadcast editors (some, but not all, of whom were former broadcasters) effectively trained those AP people to produce serviceable broadcast copy.(Your reward for all this? Significantly higher salaries in the $600+-a-week range to start and quickly rising to almost $1,000.)

Is it polished? No, often it isn't. Is it usable? Ask the thousands of stations that still "rip and read," including our own SCETV Radio. Is it "TV"? Hardly. But it gets used by TV stations. And then again, much of TV isn't really good TV ... and video on demand is going to radically change its model in the next decade, which could mean much diminshed roles for anchors. (Check out WXXA in Albany that allows you to assemble your own newscast, or Feedroom's video on demand.)

So my thoughts:
  • Anyone who wants to be successful in journalism in the future still should get really good at one or two things. (If you want to do broadcast, for instance, learn how to do TV really well; if in print, learn multiple writing styles and, just as important, learn how to drill down deep into information fast.)
  • But you also need to be familiar with the other aspects. If you are a print reporter on a story, you will need to develop a visual eye. It not only will help your writing, but you might also have a photographer with you who shoots not only stills but video. Both of you working together instead of staying in your own "silos" will produce a much more effective story. If you are a TV reporter, you need to think about the Web and maybe print. You need to get more information than that 15-second SOT. Getting documents might be very important for the Web, where an interactive database using data you've gathered might be the better "story." And who do you think is writing those "headline" crawls? Both print and broadcast may have to think in terms of "sound," as the Web turns into the new radio.
  • The key term for the new information age will be rapid relevance -- the ability to get relevant information to your audience quickly and in whatever form that individual consumer desires. That means learning still other new things that we just now are exploring -- moblogging, effective link discovery/sorting/presenting, etc.
Little of this is here yet. But then again, the Web really wasn't "here" until a decade ago. And digital video is just becoming "here" at many stations. And newspapers didn't think they had to publish continuously on the Web or "daypart" information, both of which are becoming more common. You're training to get a job now, but to thrive in 10 years. Are you willing to take the chance?

As for salaries and job prospects: Sadly, it remains true that if you expect to get rich quick, go into biotechnology or some similar field. Lee Becker at the Unversity of Georgia, does annual surveys of the journalism job market. Here's the latest headline: Job Market for Journalism Graduates Remains Weak
The median salary has remained steady at about $26,000. Broadcast salaries remain among the lowest starting salaries (link to report on "salaries by employer type" (PDF document)).

Now, having said that, let me leaven it with this: The reason to go into journalism is not the writing (or the money), but the reporting. The writing is a tool, albeit an important one, to convey that information. You must love to get information -- to have doors slammed in your face, to be told no, to press on because finally getting to the bottom of it is an adrenaline rush. And we're not talking just investigative reporting here. Any story, if done well, has some aspect of that. In TV, it may be as simple as capturing just that right visual. But the principle is the same across media -- the true pros know how to get just the right stuff, no matter what medium they are working in.

I have seen too many who got into it for the "writing" only to fail to understand that reporting underpins all the writing, and when they came to realize that, it terrified some to the point close to nervous breakdown. Others rose to the challenge.

In college, take challenging courses. Stay alert. Know what's going on in all of journalism. Snatch at whatever opportunities come along to broaden and deepen your knowledge so that you get better and faster at what you do. Do not be myopic. In any field, those who really know their stuff will always do better because they will be fast and accurate. Maybe not at first. But in the long run, the race goes to the swift.

Friday, October 22, 2004

Another thanks

Thanks to Steved Rubel at Micro Persuasion for his nice post about J-School Year.

Micro Persuasion is a blog every journalist should check from time to time, but especially anyone in J-school planning to go into PR. Steve does a great job of tracking how the rise of micro publishing and citizen journalism is affecting marketing and PR. Check out this post, for instance, on a Mazda stealth marketing blog.

Thursday, October 21, 2004

Thanks ... and another j-blog

Thanks to Tim Porter at First Draft for the nice comments about A J-School Year.

And as a result, we discovered another j-student group blog, jschool05.

Sunday, October 03, 2004

I need help

I am beginning to sink my teeth into the wonderful world of applying for internships, and I have no idea where to begin. I know the whole "make yourself look great on a resume" routine, but what is necessary to send to set yourself apart from other applicants? I feel like I am in high school again applying for scholarships, only this time the stakes are a little bit higher, so I feel more pressure. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Friday, October 01, 2004

Hard news is necessary

One bit of disappointment I've experienced with my fellow senior semester-mates is their unwillingness to cover hard news stories. Some of them say they're simply uninterested in the events of the day, but I guarantee if something horrible were to happen close to home--a fire, a natural disaster, some unforeseen tragedy--they'd be glued to the television or newspaper for updates.

We take media for granted until we need it for information. At the point at which they need it, people become impatient and suddenly demand that the media devote attention to the issues they deem important. How often do we hear someone say, "Why hasn't there been any coverage of (insert issue here) in the paper lately? Why haven't there been any news reports on (again, insert)?"

The fact is that while some stories are no-brainers--a fire, a natural disaster, some unforeseen tragedy--others tend to slip under the public radar. A particular issue might lose its luster over time, but be no less important now than earlier.

Here's one observation: It's easy to see the shocking news of now but less easy to disern the questions surrounding the event. Is it my imagination, or is the "why" or "how" being obscured from news? The "who/what/where/when" is vital, but the underlying factors seem to be glossed over. It requires a reporter dedicated enough, and an editor willing enough, to dig into the layers of an issue, if any exist.

So many journalists want their own column, which often is only a forum for one's opinion with no facts given to support it. That's the easy way out. It's what I used to want, but I'd rather learn a few new things than merely spout off about what I already know. Hard news isn't boring news for either the reporter or the reader/viewer.