"If your Mother says she loves you, check it out"

As I am undertaking investigative journalism as a subject next semester, I found myself anticipating this lecture as somewhat of an introductory session; one I felt required my attention not simply because I would need to later write a summary of it. I'm not entirely sure what I envisioned our lecture on investigative journalism would be like, but I didn't expect it to be what it was. Not that the lecture wasn't interesting, I just felt it wasn't overly informative. Alas, a blog post is required.

The format was fairly straightforward, various quotes and definitions spinning a fairly easy to grasp concept of what investigative journalism was ultimately all about. Though as I alluded to previously, it felt markedly shallow, however there were a number of points that did pique my interest.

An investigative requirement

This was the first time I had heard the term "Shoe Leather Journalism". While being a rather easy term to understand, I felt those three words were a greater summation of investigative journalism than any I had heard prior. Because when you remove the onion layer of ambiguity formed by 'expert' definition upon 'expert' definition, investigative journalism is quite simply leaving the desk and computer behind, and physically seeking answers through self-interaction. While perhaps not overly compelling to some, I found humour in its simplicity. 

Another topic I found interesting were Bruce's slides on investigative 'trailblazers'. Of specific note, his comments surrounding W. T. Stead's influence on the people trafficking industry in the late 19th century. In a case almost perfectly suited to the saying "the end justifies the means", Stead was arrested for his involvement in the attempted procurement of a young girl for sex that was orchestrated by he and the Salvos as a way of bringing police attention to the matter, and by doing so also raised the legal age of consent from 12 to 16. 

Stories like these are what I look for as inspiration to becoming a journalist. In an industry renowned for bad reputations, where it's considered by many as almost an obligation to despise us, the ability to physically change circumstances for the better is something that generates a sense of hope. Despite my previous misgivings regarding the content of the lecture, I believe it to be very effective in that sense. Surprisingly so, I am now looking forward to next semester. Bring on JOUR1710!

Now all I need are some leather shoes...

(Apologies for the last two posts being out of order, I wasn't able to attend this lecture and have therefore only recently caught it up)

"It's more of a stream of consciousness thing.."

Without trying to sound overly melodramatic, in recent weeks I have found myself questioning if being a sports journalist was still what I want to do. It always had to be something sports-related; that's who I am. Using my Uncle (Sports Director for the Australian Radio Network) as inspiration, and my Grade 12 English teacher's assurance that I "write good and stuff" (eloquently taken out of context), I settled on my path. A path that, until a few hours ago, wound more through dense cloud than along a brightly coloured brick road.

Oh the imagery..

My last lecture for JOUR1111. It didn't disappoint.

"BUILD YOUR OWN BRAND"

In no way being offensive to Bruce, this was definitely the most compelling lecture of the course. While previous lectures related more to information and content (as is understandably required), guest lecturer Steve Molk brought a refreshing new outlook to journalism that I have recently found myself grasping for.

By his own admission, Steve Molk hasn't been in the media industry for long. Despite his many assurances to the contrary, Molk is very modest when it comes to what he has achieved. 

"1.5 million views per month... nothing really," was the reply, when asked of the popularity of his website MolksTVTalk. Perhaps compared to some of the larger sites, numbers like this seem small. But for a person who, in only a little over 18 months work, has built an audience of roughly 130,000 unique viewers, established close contacts within the media industry and holds 17 weekly radio time slots, Steve Molk is somewhat of an inspiration. 

"START PUBLISHING YOUR OWN STUFF"

Molk's comments on the current media climate were very interesting to note. He spoke of traditional journalism as something that cannot die, citing the expansion of an online medium as a 'third-arm' to the continual evolution of the news format. Quoting a statistic of a 15% decrease in print-circulation each year, Molk urged everyone in attendance to familiarise themselves with the online medium. Don't write blogs or use twitter simply because your course requires it; understand the benefits these outlets can bring and embrace the direction journalism is heading. 

Thanks to Bruce Redman, I now have a greater understanding of this direction. 

Thanks to Steve Molk, my yellow brick road is infinitely more clear.

Now it's time to start enjoying it. 

Annotated Bibliography

Print (Webpage): Calmes, J & Baker, P. (2012, May 9). Obama Says Same-Sex Marriage Should Be Legal. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/us/politics/obama-says-same-sex-marriage-should-be-legal.html?_r=1

The authors of this article both specialise in politics, working as White House correspondents for the most successful newspaper in the world, The New York Times. Being an online article, the authors were able to provide greater depth of detail that the ABC Radio National’s Breakfast program was unable to, choosing therefore to focus on the lead-up to Obama’s same-sex announcement, and the reasons behind it. Citing ‘advisers’, the article pushes the theory that Obama was pressured into the announcement, noting especially that Vice-President Joe Biden’s unanticipated support for same-sex marriage only days prior “undoubtedly accelerated the timetable” (Calmes & Baker, 2012). Emphasis is created on the notion of Obama’s views on same-sex marriage being evolutionary – something that Obama referenced in his speech, while “invoking his Christian faith in explaining his decision” (Calmes & Baker, 2012). From here, the article moves towards how Obama’s speech will be received by voters, citing the speech may lessen Obama’s support amongst the white working-class and many African-Americans. The inclusion of comments made by openly gay Democratic representative for Massachusetts, Barney Frank, contradicts these claims, in which he states, “every time somebody does something that’s supportive of our rights, it turns out to be popular and not very controversial.” This shows preference of the authors against holding a particular opinion, in favour of remaining largely neutral.

Radio: Kelly, F. (2012, May 10). ABC Radio National Breakfast [Radio broadcast]. Sydney, NSW: Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Fran Kelly, host of the ABC Radio National’s much vaunted Breakfast program, brings more than 25 years of experience in current affairs journalism -ten of which were spent working in the heart of Australian politics- in discussing Barrack Obama’s stance on same-sex marriage. Kelly begins the piece by playing a sound bite of Obama’s speech supporting same-sex marriage, before providing a powerful comparison, stating that only the previous day voters in North Carolina had approved a state constitutional amendment forbidding same-sex marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships. The motivation for Obama’s statement is then brought into question when Kelly invites American Political Commentator and Author David Mark to weigh-in on the subject. Mark alludes to increased pressure on Obama from members of his own cabinet, and from influential donors, as probable reasons of Obama’s speech, maintaining “the White House must have felt there was more upside than downside or else they wouldn’t have taken the stance” (Mark, 2012). Kelly segues into the question of this ‘upside’ smoothly, highlighting data which suggests voters as a whole won’t be overly concerned over Obama’s speech, having largely already made up their minds, before ending the segment in reference to Australia’s similar political climate involving the same-sex marriage debate, providing proof of relevance to an Australian audience. While the information provided within the piece is vastly similar to that of The New York Times, the radio medium allows for a greater sense of viewer interaction; provoking discussion rather than a single, definitive opinion.  

Television: Channel 7. (Writer). The Morning Show [Television broadcast]. Sydney, NSW: Seven West Media Ltd.

As with ABC Radio National’s piece, Channel 7’s The Morning Show opens their segment by playing a recording of Obama’s speech on same-sex marriage; choosing to include a small portion of footage as opposed to the ABC’s longer, audio-only depiction. This can be seen as a difference of mediums, while the time allocated to each segment indicates The Morning Show felt the topic wasn’t as newsworthy as the ABC did. From here, a very brief reference is provided to the pressure Obama faced; citing gay rights groups as the primary reason, something that was not noted by The New York Times or the ABC. Calling on US correspondent Angela Cox next, the point is raised that while Obama’s support of same-sex marriage is “a really big deal” (Cox, 2012), from a practical point of view it means very little in terms of policy changes, calling the announcement “symbolically very important” (Cox, 2012). References to Obama’s evolution on same-sex marriage, Vice-President Joe Biden’s support for, and North Carolina’s vote against the issue segues into an affirmation of a probable decline in support from white working-class and African-American voters. The Morning Show is typically very news-focused, citing relevant facts and ignoring unnecessary information. While not as in-depth as The New York Times, the presentation of the story through the television medium still provided the most pertinent information, in a far shorter period of time.

Peer Review: Weaver, D & Wu, W. (1996). A journalism & mass communication quarterly potpourri. Political Communication. 13:2, 250-254

David Weaver was a distinguished professor at Indiana University, maintaining a faculty position within the School of Journalism for 27 years, much of which was spent teaching political communication. Weaver addresses the question “can economic news coverage affect election outcomes?” (Weaver, 1996) Citing a 12 year study from Goidel and Langley that found economic coverage was “consistent with economic indicators” (Weaver, 1996), the conclusion was made that media emphasis on the negative will cause public opinion to shift accordingly, and vice versa. From here, the scope of the article shifts towards how media outlets reach their audiences across differing mediums. Weaver cites a 1995 study by Martinelli and Chaffee which argued each medium attended to a different level of audience participation; newspapers provided increased exposure to political learning while television garnered greater audience attention and therefore larger knowledge base. A comparison with Jan P. Vermeer’s study (Vermeer, 1995) on election competitiveness further corroborates the hypothesis that news coverage can affect election outcomes, in which Vermeer concluded areas with multiple media sources “can expect less consensus if opinion diversity extends to opinions about political candidates” (Weaver, 1996). Weaver continues to references further studies, before concluding that while the media may play a role, significantly it is an individual’s “firm linkage of ethics and morals to one’s self-concept” (Weaver, 1996) that underpins their decision making processes. 

Setting the Agenda, somewhat.

"In truly effective thinking, the prime necessity is to liquidate judgments, regain an innocent eye, disentangle feelings, and be open-hearted." - Lippman

It starts here, with a lackluster opening sentence emphasising my inability to today write coherently. Next, a somewhat irrelevant pre-amble regarding the various happenings which occurred in the lead-up to this, the most recent lecture, whilst punctuating every other word with only-slightly relevant adjectives which serve to only further highlight the aforementioned inability, before mercifully continuing on to the actual topic.

(Segue to dowdy journalism student discussing said-topic)

AGENDA SETTING!
Fun stuff, to be sure. 

Basically, it was an information overload. From setting the four basic agendas, (public, policy, corporate and media) Bruce then proceeded to branch into a plethora of sub-topics, each working as a veritable piece to the overall puzzle that is 'Agenda Setting.' But what IS it, and where the deuce did the term come from? 

A pun, for the well read / versed / spoken watched.

Well kids, in the fall of 1968, Uncle Max McCombs and Donald Shaw conducted an 'experiment' during the presidential election campaign in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Surveying 100 undecided voters, they asked what voters believed to be the main 'issues' that the running candidates should focus on addressing. This data was compared with recent political-related media content, and what they found was a significant trend towards the media emphasising a subject or topic, and the public's opinion on the matter. Therefore, the media was seen to be setting the agenda with which the public cried foul on the politicians. More than 40 years on, and this still occurs.

Agenda Setting: The more coverage an issue receives, the more important it is to the people.

Once my peers and I had achieved a basic understanding of the concept, we were inevitably force-fed with the aforementioned sub-topics. Fortunately they were fairly easy to grasp, and even easier to summarise...

• Media Gatekeeping
• Media exposure and control of content.
• Media Advocacy
• Purposeful prevention of a message.
• Agenda Cutting
• Majority isn't represented.
• Media attention invariably translates to public interest.
• Agenda Surfing (Bandwagon Effect)
• Media follows crowd trends.
• Existing public opinion causes bandwagon effect. (see: Kony2012)
• News Diffusion
• Process of communication between media and public.
• Issue Portrayal
• Alternating representation of similar topics.
• Influence public perception.
• Media Dependence
• The more we are dependent on the media for information, the more susceptible we are to altered perceptions; hence agenda setting.

In essence, it has become even harder in today's society to trust in your own opinion. Because of the levels of generalised agenda setting that have become commonplace in all forms of news-related content, there is a stark difference between knowing what is happening, and knowing what you are being told is happening. 

" The press may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about." - Bernard Cohen

Reminiscent

So I was going through my hard drive when I stumbled upon some of my old Film & Television assignments from Grade 12. I figured why not put them up here for others to see? Please be gentle..

Swedish House Mafia - Save the World 

(Music Video)

'Love' 

(Avant-garde Film)

~ Callum

But when a man bites a dog..

Now THAT'S news!

Following on from the oh-so-fabulous introduction to journalistic ethics last week, we were today provided a rather enigmatic view on news, newsworthiness, and the values that accompany them. Today's lecture had everything, from (bordering-on-racist) comments about our neighbours across the Tasman to a joke or two about an image of a poor English fellow, it's any wonder we got any work done at all. But Bruce is the consummate professional, and he didn't disappoint.

After the now accepted (and expected) reference to the 'Inverted Pyramid', we were thrust once more into the world of journalistic ideals, morals and concepts. Bruce posed the question, "are values the same across different media services, countries and cultures?" While the answer is an obvious one to most, the extent to which many in the room were willing to commit to a response meant we weren't entirely educated on the reasoning 'why'. This is where 'newsworthiness' became an important talking point.

"A sense of news values is the first quality of editors - they are the human sieves of the torrent of news, even more important even than an ability to write or a command of language." 

- Harold Evans, 2000

There were numerous given examples from 'expert' commentators on how to define a story's newsworthiness; lists upon lists compiled of garbled text that seemed largely hypocritical of itself. For one of the most common examples provided was 'simplicity of a story'; congratulations, you've managed to complicate a definition of simplicity! For this reason, I'm going to largely ignore these lists and focus on the (in my opinion) most useful.

Murray Masterson wrote of the 'Big 6' in regards to the newsworthiness of a story.

1. Significance; how relevant/important the story is in the 'scheme' of things.
   
2. Proximity; is the story a local/national/international event? Stories given precedence based on the viewing audience and the media outlet providing the content.
   
3. Conflict; large or minor scale (depending on the media outlet), from warring nations (News of the World) to feuding neighbours (ACA, Today Tonight etc).
   
4. Human Interest; not necessarily important information-wise. 'Feel good' stories, celeb-gossip. etc.
   
5. Novelty; something 'out of the ordinary' or not of normal occurrence (see: man bites dog).
   
6. Prominence; are stories such as this happening in other places? How frequent and to what degree?

Towards the end of the lecture, Bruce touched once again on hyper-commercialisation. "You don't control the eyeballs" was a comment made by Jay Rosen, directed at this hyper-commercialisation that sees mass media mergers trending towards controlling what we as a viewing audience are subjected to; 'subjected' painting a poignant picture of just how controlling they have become.

And the media knows it.

Should we be worried? Somewhat. But I believe with this hyper-commercialisation we must remember that media organisations can only function as a commercial enterprise as long as there is an audience willing to continue viewing. There can therefore never be a stage where we have no single choice as to what news we receive - because then there would be no media to provide it.

Unless commercial media has a death wish.

Factual Story; Alyssa Dick

Youtube Link: JOUR1111 Factual Story

Bad, wrong, or simply tacky?

Ethics. 

This isn't a word synonymous with interesting conversation, however in today's lecture we almost got there - almost. Bruce stepped aside today, making way for Dr John Harrison, a fellow colleague from UQ's school of journalism. Blessed (as we were assured) by his presence, Mr Harrison didn't leave many in the lecture theater today wondering how he has achieved so much in the industry. He is knowledgeable, witty and a great communicator. After a somewhat humourous exercise involving various advertisements and their ethical validity, we moved onto the 'nitty gritty'. 

As Mr Harrison stressed, there are three (and only three!) 'ethical theories'; Deontology, Consequentialism and Virtuism. 

• Deontology
• Rules, Principles and Duties; All ethics 'codes' are Deontological.
• "Do unto others as you would have done to you."

 The Journalist's code of ethics is therefore deontological, made up of specific rules and principles designed to keep a journalist ethically 'in-check'. 

• Consequentialism
• "The end justifies the means."

Consequentialism can be considered a majoritarian belief, in that what is ethically correct is derived from the judgement of a majority; but can this be truly the correct course of action? Mr Harrison reasonably argues no.

"What makes a good journalist is what sort of person you are, not what rules you follow"
- John Harrison

Which brings me to the last of the ethical theories,

• Virtuism
• Habits of character; courage, justice, temperance and prudence
• The 'golden mean' of behaviour. 

Virtuism proposes that these habits of character are what define a person's ethical properties. Each can be found in the middle of extreme habits which societal concepts deem unethical, hence the 'golden mean' of behaviour. 

As a Journalist, there are a plethora of ethical codes with which to adhere to, however by their very nature -being deontological- one can argue they lack substance. This is what separates 'good' and 'great' Journalists. Not by their ability, but through their virtues. 

I want to be a great Journalist.

Pyjamas for Sick Kids

I'm going to take a step away from the norm and share a (very rough mind you) draft of mine for a JOUR1112 assignment, due more to the content itself than anything else, as I hope to spread the word a little further. If you could take the time to read , I would be very appreciative. 

Pyjamas for Sick Kids

Pyjamas are a precious commodity in Australian hospitals, according to Brisbane Mater Children’s Hospital’s Volunteer Coordinator Rosy Bratt. So much so that the Hospital’s volunteer organisation is in the final stages of planning its first ever ‘Pyjama Drive’. Similar events have met with varied success in a number of hospitals across Australia, however Miss Bratt maintains there is a more personal reason behind this particular Pyjama Drive.

“Need. Need of the kids coming in and not having the pyjamas, and staff saying 'ok, how can we do this?' Staff have an idea but they don’t have the time to do it, so as volunteer services we say to them 'where are the gaps in your team, where can we put volunteers in to help with that?' The Director of Nursing contacted me to see if there was anything we could do, and this was an idea that we decided upon. It’s for the kids that, as I say, have come from low socio-economic backgrounds or from interstate.”

Passionate as ever in her work, Miss Bratt welcomes any prospective volunteers.
“If people are interested, we currently have over 100 vacancies. If there are students who are looking to do volunteering, our shifts run 8am to 12pm and 12pm to 4pm, Monday to Friday. We ask that you come for an information session, where you get a lot of information about volunteer services, our core values, what you can expect as a volunteer and what you can expect from us.”

When asked to provide a figure, Miss Bratt was straightforward.
“As many as we can get”.

If you are interested in donating or becoming a volunteer, you can contact Miss Bratt via email at Rosy.Bratt@mater.org.au or visit their stall at the UQ Health Fair on May 16^th for more information. 

"Why is this lying bastard lying to me?"

“Public media is important because it is the last bastion of long-form investigative Journalism. It is such a special vehicle for voices to be heard... visions and view-points that are ignored by commercial media.” Robert Richter 

So.. yesterday's lecture was another that I couldn't attend, but this time for legitimate reasons. A scheduled 1pm appointment at the Mater Children's Hospital commenced.. almost on-time. It was 2:10pm when we got underway; by 3pm I was having a needle shoved into my arm. Oh the joys of Journalism! Alas, I knew when I got back to college I would need to view our latest lecture, struggling against an aching back and pounding headache. Sleep is for the weak, as they say.

Ignoring the above drivel, yesterday's lecture was a continuation from our previous lecture on Commercial Media, this time focusing on the alternative - Public Media. The first impression that I gained of Public Media when Bruce alluded to it in the previous lecture, was that the primary difference was the lack of commercial funding. That is, networks like the ABC and SBS received no monetary support outside of public and government funding. This was true, up until recently. As quoted by Bruce, "public media is less associated with taxpayer supported media. It may be for profit so long as its ultimate purpose is to serve the public and not turn a profit." (WGBH Educational Foundation Conference, September 2006) 

The ABC and SBS are Australia's two 'main' forms of Public Media Broadcasting

This raised my eyebrow. No longer is the divide between Commercial and Public Media clearly defined by revenue raising, but by the morally ambiguous 'biased versus unbiased' claim. At this point, I was somewhat skeptical of there really being a 'true' form of Public Media still in existence. It was about this time then, that Bruce brought up a very interesting point. The Government HATES the ABC. No matter the party in control, there has been a long-running history of discontent between the Government and the ABC. Which begs the question, why? The ABC is majority-funded by the Government, so surely they would have government interests in consideration, right? 

Nope.

This my friends, is the true difference between Commercial and Public Media. Whereas Commercial Broadcasters will literally bend over backwards to ensure continued revenue raising, 'true' Public Broadcasters do not. To use an old adage, they must 'bite the hand that feeds them' in order to remain under the banner of 'Public Media'. 

While not entirely my cup of tea, this discussion has raised a number of very interesting questions. When we look at networks like NZTV (who became completely privatised through commercial funding) , do we see an example of the inevitable? As Bruce so eloquently put it, we are safe as long as the Government hates the ABC - for the ABC is owned by the PEOPLE; where its primary interests should henceforth lie.

Media Madness

A confession must be made, for I was absent for this, our most recent lecture. The sandman had mischievously snuck into my room and worked his magic, with a still-weary me waking 4 hours after the fact - nice work Callum! Perhaps this was a blessing in disguise however. Undoubtedly any thought of concentration would have been quickly subdued, while interests that happened to be piqued throughout my review of the recording were easily accessible with a click of the mouse. Oh reasoning, how I love you.

Moving right along... I found myself in the midst of one of the most-discussed topics in contemporary media, the controversial Commercial versus Public media debate that has only intensified with the recent inclusion of 'specialty' channels to free-to-air.

Bruce made the point that commercial media thrives on consumerism, that without demand there is certainly no profit. "Survives or fails on business success", as the slide put it. Through this, it was maintained that advertising was a key factor in revenue-raising for these commercial media companies, making the following graphic both compelling and accurate:

Because they are! We have established that the premise of these companies staying in-business is by controlling their revenue flow. Advertising provides for an overwhelming majority of this income, so much so that commercial companies are literally bending over backwards to accommodate them. 

According to fabc.org, "to ensure advertisers get maximum exposure to potential customers, broadcast programs are selected to attract as large a target audience as possible, for as little expenditure as possible, at any single time." 

This in itself raises a number of issues. The main point of concern raised in the lecture was the ability (or lack thereof) of commercial media towards the delivery of both commercial (profit) and social ('public trust') functions; being able to produce profit whilst retaining the viewer's sense of 'trust' in what they are being shown. This 'trust' is broken as soon as a media company chooses to promote or silence something so as not to harm revenue uptake. Such cases of this occurring include:

"The ‘dumbing down’ of programming to the lowest common denominator to secure large audiences, which includes a trend away from quality in-depth information, and toward lightweight, ‘infotainment-style’ programming; and a preference for US over Australian local programming. US programming - having already covered its costs and made its profit in the far larger... US market - is sold to Australia at rates far lower than the cost of Australian production." (fabc.org)

To add to this, pressure from 'higher powers' have notably influenced how media companies handle themselves; Rupert Murdoch's recent phone tapping scandal case-in-point. A media company's content is influenced by their need to promote and avoid offending those with whom they serve to do business with. Where being 'unbiased' is considered one of the foremost qualities of a good Journalist, Commercial Media has committed itself to being anything but. 

.. however I still love my Home & Away.

"Radio is the Theater of the Mind"

I was a little skeptical at first, when Bruce mentioned our next lecture would be a sound recording on Blackboard rather than the usual physical interaction of the previous lectures. I assumed it would be simple dictation by Bruce himself regarding our next topic, so needless to say I was surprised when I found myself more of an 'invisible' third-party to two very interesting radio interviews.

Having spent two weeks at ABC Tropical North radio station in Mackay, I was somewhat aware of the goings-on behind the scenes of radio shows. I helped interview people, sourced stories, edited recordings and wrote introductions. This experience I believe was advantageous when interpreting this 'sound' lecture. I was able to grasp a greater understanding and appreciation of what was being discussed.

The first interview seemed centred around how to interview a guest - interesting as the guest in this sense was quite obviously very used to being in the other chair! It was easy to tell from an early stage that Richard Fidler is very passionate about what he does, and his insight was invaluable. "The voice doesn't seem to 'come at you' (like television), but come from inside your head" he said. This certainly seemed the case, perhaps in part due to the headphones protruding from either ear at the time..

Richard stressed the importance of avoiding 'closed conversations' with your guest, that it is paramount as a presenter to be able to keep the audience feeling part of the conversation. He also mentions that while conventional wisdom dictates 7 minutes for a radio interview, 'conversations' may go for as long as an hour. In such circumstances, finding and maintaining interest in the subject matter is arguably the hardest and most beneficial ability in producing an interesting show.

Among other things, Richard also alluded to the importance of humour, and the ability to keep a guest feeling at-ease within the situation, citing simple gestures like moving away from the microphone and pausing to promote responses as vital in getting the most out of your guest. 

"We want to be useful and give them something... 

there is a kind of sense of public service, and this is what 

keeps you energetic and happy in the job" 

(Richard Fidler)

Far from the wrestling ring of his namesake, Steve Austin was the second guest interviewed as part of our 'sound' lecture, tapping into his well of knowledge and past experiences to provide further insight into the life of a radio presenter. After a brief introduction, Steve proceeded to reference a plethora of very useful points, which I believe can be more-easily explained through direct-quote.

"In radio, your annunciation matters, you can't speak like you would at University or in the street... be yourself, but you need to communicate."

"Bring down the barriers between you and the listener."

"If you're fake on radio, people can smell it a mile off."

"Try to empathise (with the guest) vocally... don't do anything on radio you wouldn't do in real life."

"Be human. Explore the full gamut of human experience. Don't believe those that say human beings are rational, thinking creatures. We can be, but we react emotionally and subconsciously." 

"For night-time radio, you must talk less and listen more... to show respect, listen to them... if you don't understand someone, listen to them, don't berate them."

"Ideas in London matter... everything spreads from that point."

And Steve Austin's final piece of advice,

"If like me you're not naturally talented, don't give up. If you really, seriously are hungry for it, go after it. There are plenty of big-name people today who were told they would never get into radio or television... you may become a more interesting person after a few knock-backs."

Radio,

the Theater 

of the Mind

Personal Media Journal

Please Note: Because I needed to convert the graphs and tables into image files, their quality has lessened as a result.

Media Logging

The statistics shown below were recorded and collated over a ten (10) day period between 13/03/12 and 22/03/12, the purpose of which was to identify personal media-usage and compare this data with a corresponding survey taken by my JOUR1111 peers.

NOTE: There are a number of notable inconsistencies in the survey data that must be addressed. The survey was taken BEFORE students were required to create Blogger and Twitter accounts. Questions 6, 7, 8 and 9 were directly affected, while question 13 was indirectly affected. For the purposes of comparison within this report however, I will be using the data as provided by the survey document.

                10-day Media-Use Comparison (Minutes)

(See: Appendix A)

As the above table shows, I used Facebook almost twice as much as my second-highest media source (Blogger). This corroborates data represented in the survey, where 91.9% of students claimed they spent a large amount of their time using Facebook (much higher than the 61.3% for ‘General Browsing’).

What is even more interesting however, is that the top four highest forms of personal media-use are all associated under the same medium; the Internet. This is further highlighted by the survey data, which shows that 96.8% of surveyed students spend at least 1 hour each day using the internet, as opposed to 68% and 29.4% for Television and Radio respectively, over the same time period.

Personal Media-Use Comparison

This graph compares my time spent using each of the four ‘main’ mediums. As is clearly evident, an overwhelming majority of my time was spent using the Internet (86%), while Print and Television usage shared 7% each. This shows the dominance of ‘New Media’ in relation to ‘Old Media’. (See: Appendix B, C)

After considering how effectively my personal data corroborates with the survey data, a relative conclusion may be formed which suggests that, as a group, my peers and I spend the majority of our media-related time using the Internet, as opposed to other forms of media.

At this stage, it is important to note a number of reasons as to why this data may be slightly misleading. My media-use has changed significantly since I moved away from home and settled into college life at University. Access to Newspapers, Television and Radio has significantly decreased, resulting in the far lower usage numbers that have been detailed above. Not only this, but due to the requirements of a number of my University subjects, my Internet usage has increased to accommodate this, most notably through Blogger and Twitter (of which I had never used previously).

Another reasonable assumption therefore, is that a number of my peers may be under similar circumstances. This makes the survey data difficult to interpret, as this is impossible to distinguish, while the ability to provide more than one answer to certain questions proved difficult when trying to compare media-usage across mediums.

In collating and comparing this data, it has become obvious that the Internet has become the leading source of news, information and correspondence. Personally, this assessment has shown that I am pursuing a career in which the Internet has proven to be a beneficial and necessary tool, providing confidence that I am on the correct path towards a career that both suits and interests me.

 APPENDIX

Appendix A:

 | Facebook – 24% | Blogger – 22% | Twitter – 16% | General Browsing - 13% | Newspaper – 8% | Television – 7% | Email – 5% | Youtube – 4% | Podcast – 1% | Radio – 0% |

                Appendix B:         

| New Media – 86% | Old Media – 14% |

                Appendix C:

Shadows on a cave wall

Let me be honest with you. I'm currently at a loss for any interesting introductory segues. In fact, I'm at a loss in regards to a number of things. Sleep first and foremost. Therefore, I shall endeavour to spare any poor soul who for some reason finds the time to read the next few paragraphs and make this as brief as possible.

My fourth JOUR1111 lecture largely followed the script of its predecessors. Until it actually began that is. For this lecture would be focusing on pictures - in particular, telling factual stories with them. This was a subject for which I was already somewhat versed in, thanks to my Visual Communication subject, which oddly enough holds its lectures in the same room. While not as in-depth as COMU1999, Dr Redman was still able to hold my attention (and everyone else's for that matter) through another useful tool - humour.

In-fact, what made the lecture worth my time was the subtle way he was able to convey his message while keeping it very much lighthearted. Perhaps it was the subject matter that made it so easy, for it WAS funny in its own right. From badly photo-shopped images of  a white man's head on a black man's body to a model with a waist so impossibly thin she would have given barbie a run for her money. Because that's what images in the media have become to some people, a way to visually communicate with an audience that, if effective, garners a far greater emotional response than text alone. But are we overdoing it?

If you are a fellow JOUR1111 student of mine, then you (should) have seen this video during the lecture. We all gasped and groaned as we watched the magic of technology drastically alter this woman's face beyond prior recognition. This video highlights a vile truth. Modern marketing has sunk so low as to alter the face of their brand to impossible extremes in order to sell a product on a buyer's presumption that the face they see is what they're buying. It is not.

An un-named freelance photographer was fired after altering the original image (right) to make it

 look as though there was more smoke rising from burning buildings following an Israeli airstrike in Beirut. 

An image released by a North Korean news agency of Kim Jong Il's funeral, in which 

a film crew was removed from the original photograph (left).

Doctored images like those shown above are an ever-common occurrence, in some cases altering how information is perceived and history recorded. Will the day come where a photograph can no longer be considered a primary source? While we accept that history is recorded by the victor, it is in images that this history is portrayed - images that, if this practice of photo editing continues, will cease to be reliable.

Now, I know I have skipped largely over the crux of Dr Redman's lecture in favour of ranting, but I believe it is important that people are aware just how deep this type of behaviour runs. Lewis H. Lapham once said, "People may expect too much of journalism. Not only do they expect it to be entertaining, they expect it to be true." As a budding journalist, I expect it to be true. I can't except the alternative.

Perhaps Eddie Adams got it wrong when he said "if it makes you laugh, if it makes you cry, if it rips out your heart, that’s a good picture.” 

These pictures make me laugh.

These pictures make me cry.

These pictures rip out my heart..

... but they're not good pictures.

Collegehumour's take on doctored photos

The Media Game

"Using games to tell news stories forces journalists to think and work in radically different ways. But, these rich, non-linear narratives have the potential to push storytelling in new directions and engage audiences more deeply." Skye Doherty

The power of a whim had once again abandoned me, this time in favour of a more 'sociable' weekend back home. Needless to say, I took my seat in E109 with not the slightest clue as to what was in store, apart from a rather vague email from Dr Redman regarding a lady by the name of Skye Doherty.

Now, if there was ever a person who you could say has 'been there and done that', it's Skye Doherty. With little more than 10 years experience in the industry, she has already worked for media groups in Australia, South-east Asia and the UK. It was with this knowledge that I straightened my back, took the cap from my pen, turned to a blank page in my notebook and took notice.

The majority of the presentation was centred around the value and importance of text in today's media landscape. Even after the advent of radio and video, Skye argued that text still remained the main form of information communication between journalists and their viewers, noting that while the way in which this text is delivered varies according to the platform, its benefits remain.

With 20 minutes remaining before the lecture was due to end, Skye concluded her presentation. Eager as many of us were to leave early, Dr Redman called for 'question time' - an obvious attempt to kill time that wasn't lost on any of the yawning students seated throughout the lecture theater. While we sat struggling through the stereotypical "why did you want to be a journalist", one young lady in the front row posed a very interesting question. She asked Ms Doherty about her blog, particularly a post to do with 'newsgames'. A simple 'please elaborate' changed the whole direction of the lecture, for both Skye Doherty and the students to whom she was addressing.

What followed was a crash course on newsgames; from playing as a Pirate, capturing and pillaging cargo ships off the coast of Somalia in Cutthroat Capitalism to controlling a guided missile from above in September 12, Ms Doherty established the idea that just as technology is evolving, so is the way in which journalists convey news to their audience.

Once I got back to my room, I quickly jumped online and did a little research on newsgames, even playing a few myself. The idea itself is still a relatively obscure one, and from my short experiences in playing I feel there's still a long way to go - a fact agreed upon by the various minds behind the concept. University of Central Lancashire's Paul Egglestone highlighted the major 'fault' with the concept when he stated “Deadline and story-driven newsroom culture won’t support this level of creativity.” It's true.

In the mad scramble that is today's media environment, where it's not enough to simply have a story, but to have it first, a newsgame of quality requires time and effort that very few are willing to afford to it. Far from being a buzz kill however, the future is still relatively bright for newsgames - in their own niche; not simply an adjunct to a story, but a tool providing deeper understanding.

“It is very exciting and I genuinely believe it is a revolutionary way of communicating, because anything which gives you a degree of experience has got to be better than something which is sedentary or passive. But equally, it is not always appropriate. You don’t want to turn everything into a game. Either it trivialises it or it is more effort to create a game than just to do it.” John Welsh

Climbing.

I'll be quite frank with you, I live my life on a series of whims. This is where my conviction (and lack thereof) ultimately stems from. Any long-term goals I may set inevitably fall to the wayside, replaced by an apparent deep-seeded urge to fix what isn't broken. In the few days prior to my second JOUR1111 lecture, I caught hold of a whim - this one however, stuck.

I took my seat in E109, buried deep within the bowels of UQ's most iconic building, the Forgan Smith. My promptness was rewarded, of course, with a half-hour wait in the hallway - but that's in the past. From Dr Redman's first sentence, I knew this was going to be a good lecture. Remember that whim I mentioned earlier? I caught hold of it, combing through the (apparent) required reading that had been posted on Blackboard, and absorbed it. Mostly.

It was 'straight from the textbook', so to speak. This talk of old media, new media; it wasn't an overly difficult concept to grasp, but it WAS an interesting one. Where do we draw the line? Prior to this lecture, I'd decided first at port had been print-media. Then it was radio, then television and 'finally', the internet. Apparently, it's not as simple as that; it's even simpler. For the sake of grouping and labeling, all of the aforementioned forms of media (excluding the latter) fall under the banner of 'Old Media'. That is, an era of mass communication, whereby audiences are targeted according to specific markets. I thought, "okay then, so New Media is limited only to the internet?". Somewhat, but it's a little more involved than that. 

'New Media'  is an ever-expanding concept. From 'Web 1.0' to 'Web 3.0' and beyond, the media landscape is drastically changing. 

'Web 1.0' - The beginnings of the internet, the 'information web'. Very advertisement-friendly, with a general focus on giving companies the power to engage with their audience

'Web 2.0' - The 'social web'. The internet broadens further, exploring new forms of communication within the medium itself; blogging, tweeting, 'poking' (for facebook's easily amused) - targeted marketing explodes in popularity, with an overwhelming emphasis on communicating as efficiently and effectively as possible..

.. which brings us to 'Web 3.0' - The 'semantic web'. Still in relative infancy, web 3.0 was predicted in 2001 by Tim Berners-Lee (the credited 'founder' of the world wide web) when he stated "Computers must have access to structured collations of information and have set rules for relevant inferences’". In English? The semantic web involves collating information about the user and using said information to provide relevant suggestions based on prior-use. This can already be seen on sites such as Youtube and Amazon, where a user's prior search criteria is used to form "relevant inferences" regarding other videos and products (respectfully) that the site believes would interest them.

Media is changing, we understand that. We understand the concept, but perhaps not the scale. There's a vast world of information out there, behind paywalls and censorship.. but alas, that's for another day. For now, let's rest, knowing full-well that in a matter of a few short years what seems so very far away could be at our very fingertips. 

To me, that's scary.

And Exciting.

 

A New Beginning..

First day, first week, first lecture.. or was it? While the rest of my fellow JOUR1111 compatriots were eagerly awaiting their first Intro to Journalism lecture, I was on a bus on the way to the Mater Hospital. The most engaged I became with my journalistic qualities was interviewing a charming old lady on the whereabouts of Queensland X-Ray's offices. An engrossing experience, to be sure.

I quickly realised my absence would be anything but beneficial, so once back at college I called upon UQ's 105 mb/s internet and put it to the test; Lecture 1 notes acquired. The first slide provided an overwhelming sense of satisfaction. I'm a human being, I'm eager, I'm young, and sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, I want to have a good time. This, is what I want to do.

I liken this point in my life to a person climbing Mt Everest. You don't look at the mountain as a whole, but in stages. The summit of stage 1 is the base of stage 2 - I have just reached the summit of high school; stage 2, University, awaits.

BRING IT ON.

Is University Just One Big Meme?

An internet meme, for the slightly less internet savvy, is a popular image or video passed electronically from one internet user to the other, encapsulating a particularly well known 'joke' or turn of phrase. For example, frequent users of Youtube may have been unwittingly linked to Rick Astley's "Never gonna give you up" (commonly referred to as 'Rick Rolling') sometime in the past, or more recently exposed to a number of crude KONY2012 imitations. There's even whole websites dedicated entirely to cat memes!

This got me thinking. For something as basic as a cat, or as socially vague as Rick Astley, there must be memes out there somewhere regarding University right? What better way to try and understand the general consensus of  University students, than through sourcing their memes? Luckily, I didn't have to search very far.

UQ Memes is a Facebook page dedicated to memes concerning the University of Queensland and its students. While humourous, some also piqued my interest for other reasons. One meme in particular caught my eye:

I found this both funny and poignant. Being a first year student, I've endeavored to attend all my lectures, in fear of missing something relevant or important, and to be completely honest with you, the majority of them haven't been helpful at all. More than once I have contemplated getting up and leaving, if only because the content seemed useless or was easily sourced from somewhere else.

Perhaps there is an underlying culture of laziness amongst students here at UQ, or perhaps the problem lies in the presentation of information to the students. I took the opportunity to speak with a number of my fellow Union College residents over dinner last night, and asked them what their opinion was on the matter. Not to my surprise, the majority felt their lectures were dull, uninteresting and overall unhelpful.

What if these memes were used for more than just a good giggle? If you're a University student, why not try create your own meme?  Trying to understand a meme can be just as (if not even more) useful as a survey or questionnaire. As we all know, there's a sense of truth to every joke... and even Heads of Universities must understand that.

Joseph Who?

When I was first told by my JOUR1111 Lecturer that I would be required to write a blog, a number of immediate questions popped into my head. For starters, what IS a blog? Don't get me wrong, I haven't been living under that large of a rock - I'd just never ventured into that realm of the internet before. My assumption was that blogs were reserved for only a limited number of people; people who felt (and their readers felt) they had something important to say. Until a few days ago, I didn't feel I had something important to say. Until a few days ago, I didn't see how anything I said or did on this blog could be overly beneficial to anybody. Until the morning of March 5th 2012, I was completely unaware of just how powerful a single action could be. Let's just say, I've recently been converted.

Now, unless you've REALLY been living under a rock, you would have at least heard in-passing the story of Joseph Kony. Without going into great detail, Kony is largely responsible for the abduction of more than 30,000 African children over the past 26 years. Formed in 2005, Invisible Children  is a non-for-profit organisation dedicated to the rescue and rehabilitation of these children. KONY 2012 is a campaign designed to make Joseph Kony a household name; a government-known name. The following video, released on the morning of March 5th 2012, has sparked public interest en masse, sweeping newspapers, radios, television and the internet by storm.

As the old adage goes, where there's a will there's a way, and judging by the overwhelming response to KONY2012, this will has never been stronger. The message is clear. Invisible Children have provided the voice, it's time we provided the action.  It doesn't matter who you are, or where you come from . Come April 20th, let's Cover the Night.

Links:

KONY2012 Video
Invisible Children Organisation
Cover the Night