"Mistakes regularly left uncorrected." Daily Source. 6 Dec. 2009 www.dailysource.org/about/problems Copyright
2005-2009
A 1999 poll by the Columbia Journalism Review and the nonprofit research firm Public Agenda of 125 senior journalists nationwide found fully 70% of the respondents felt that most news organizations do a "poor" or "fair" job of informing the public about errors in their reporting. 91% think newsrooms need more open and candid internal idscussion of editorial mistakes and what to do about them. Almost four in ten of those people interviewed feel sure many factual errors are never corrected because reporters and editors are eager to hide their mistakes. Over 40% said their news organization does not even have a person designated to review and assess requests for corrections.
Wow, I never knew this many people, even journalists themselves think that mistakes are not covered properly. Personaly, I don't have any opinion about this issue, because I never watch TV news and I never know anything about something going on in the news that I personally know. I wish I knew some stuff about this world so that I can point out what is wrong about some news.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Sunday, November 22, 2009
journalists chase sensational topics
"Journalists chase sensational topics." Daily Source. 22 Nov. 2009 www.dailysource.org/about/problems
There is tendency for the press and journalists to publish stories that are sensational. Sensational topics people consider are: murders, accidents, kidnappings, sex scandals and the like. In a survey by the American Society of Newspaper Editors, 80 percent of the American public said they believe journalists chase sensational stories because they think it will sell papers, not because they think it is important news. Also, another 85 percent of the public believes that newspapers frequently over dramatize some news stories just to sell more papers.
It is sad that the public has a negative opinions about the news medias they are supposed to have trust. I also think that journalists seek news that sound more exciting and interesting than boring politics and environment issues. But who can blame those journalists? If a journalists keep write about some boring articles and get fired, who will feed himself/herself? Plus, we, the public love sensational topics too.
There is tendency for the press and journalists to publish stories that are sensational. Sensational topics people consider are: murders, accidents, kidnappings, sex scandals and the like. In a survey by the American Society of Newspaper Editors, 80 percent of the American public said they believe journalists chase sensational stories because they think it will sell papers, not because they think it is important news. Also, another 85 percent of the public believes that newspapers frequently over dramatize some news stories just to sell more papers.
It is sad that the public has a negative opinions about the news medias they are supposed to have trust. I also think that journalists seek news that sound more exciting and interesting than boring politics and environment issues. But who can blame those journalists? If a journalists keep write about some boring articles and get fired, who will feed himself/herself? Plus, we, the public love sensational topics too.
Monday, November 16, 2009
High Levels of media inaccurancies!
"High Levels of Media Inaccurancies." Daily Source. 11 Nov. 2009. www.dailysource.org/about/problems
There are high levels of inaccuracies in news media whether it is internet news or newspaper.
Public confidence in the media is low and it continues to go down. A poll by USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup found only 36% of Americans believe news organizations get the facts straight, compared with 54% in mid 1989. And according to an in depth study by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1999, 23% of the public find factual errors in the news stories of their daily paper at least once a week while more than a third of the public, 35% see spelling or grammar mistakes in their newspaper more than once a week. The study also found that 73% of adults in America have become more skeptical about the accuracy of their news.
Wow, if this article I found is really correct, I feel sad that the news that we are supposed to be dependent on accuracy is actually not accurate. But who knows as this article suggest, this article itself is very uncorrected. It will be very ironic. Personally, unlike the people perticipated in the survey, I feel confident about the news I get. Also, I never recognize any spelling or grammer errors (maybe because I ONLY read Korean news -_-;;) and even if I would find some errors, I won't care about it much because spelling or grammar errors does not mean that the information is incorrect.
There are high levels of inaccuracies in news media whether it is internet news or newspaper.
Public confidence in the media is low and it continues to go down. A poll by USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup found only 36% of Americans believe news organizations get the facts straight, compared with 54% in mid 1989. And according to an in depth study by the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1999, 23% of the public find factual errors in the news stories of their daily paper at least once a week while more than a third of the public, 35% see spelling or grammar mistakes in their newspaper more than once a week. The study also found that 73% of adults in America have become more skeptical about the accuracy of their news.
Wow, if this article I found is really correct, I feel sad that the news that we are supposed to be dependent on accuracy is actually not accurate. But who knows as this article suggest, this article itself is very uncorrected. It will be very ironic. Personally, unlike the people perticipated in the survey, I feel confident about the news I get. Also, I never recognize any spelling or grammer errors (maybe because I ONLY read Korean news -_-;;) and even if I would find some errors, I won't care about it much because spelling or grammar errors does not mean that the information is incorrect.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Facebook grows, makes a profit
Facebook grows, makes a profit by Agencies; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:02:00
The Facebook, the world's largest social network on the internet is finally getting some profit, the company said. Facebook company, which was started six years ago by a Harvard University student, said late Tuesday that the company gaining cash for the first time with the 300 million users. This is about a year faster than the company had predicated to gain some positive cash flows. "This is important to us because it sets Facebook up to be a strong independent service for the long term. We are succeeding at building Facebook in a sustainable way. We are just getting started on our goal of connecting everyone." said Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg in a blog posting.
I used to be a constant user of the Facebook but now I am not so this news was not a big of a deal for me much but this will be a great news for facebook users since they don't need to worry about Facebook company closing down with bankrutpcy. I never knew facebook had never gained profit ever since its business started. I know there are about 1ooo people working for that company and I wonder how the company paied their wages so far.
The Facebook, the world's largest social network on the internet is finally getting some profit, the company said. Facebook company, which was started six years ago by a Harvard University student, said late Tuesday that the company gaining cash for the first time with the 300 million users. This is about a year faster than the company had predicated to gain some positive cash flows. "This is important to us because it sets Facebook up to be a strong independent service for the long term. We are succeeding at building Facebook in a sustainable way. We are just getting started on our goal of connecting everyone." said Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg in a blog posting.
I used to be a constant user of the Facebook but now I am not so this news was not a big of a deal for me much but this will be a great news for facebook users since they don't need to worry about Facebook company closing down with bankrutpcy. I never knew facebook had never gained profit ever since its business started. I know there are about 1ooo people working for that company and I wonder how the company paied their wages so far.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
As goes media freedom, so go democracies
Written by By Joel Brinkley Sunday, October 4, 2009
If we want to know if one's nation is truly democratic, one must check oneself's media. How does the nation treat the media? The article suggest that nothing so directly challenges a corrupt leader as an aggressive news media. The writer gives an example of himself that he was in Iraq during 2003, the beginning part of the war. When he was there, he could see many independent Iraqi newspaper and TV stations. But as time passed, the freedom of the press was taken away and journalists are threantened. The Iraqi government is suing and harassing reporters. In July, The Economist reported, police arrested a journalist for taking pictures of a typical, massive Baghdad traffic jam, saying the photos reflected badly on Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's campaign to demonstrate that the quality of life was improving. Last month during September, about 100 Iraqi journalists had a protest of growing restrictions on their work, shouting: "No, no to muzzling; yes, yes to freedom!"
This news was interesting to me because this kind of rediculous thing will not happen in America. Who would dare to arrest a journalist for taking a picture of LA's or NewYork City's traffic jam? I guess if this report by Joel Brinkley is true, America is a true democratic nation. News medias are busy trying to disgrace political figures (like Fox news).
If we want to know if one's nation is truly democratic, one must check oneself's media. How does the nation treat the media? The article suggest that nothing so directly challenges a corrupt leader as an aggressive news media. The writer gives an example of himself that he was in Iraq during 2003, the beginning part of the war. When he was there, he could see many independent Iraqi newspaper and TV stations. But as time passed, the freedom of the press was taken away and journalists are threantened. The Iraqi government is suing and harassing reporters. In July, The Economist reported, police arrested a journalist for taking pictures of a typical, massive Baghdad traffic jam, saying the photos reflected badly on Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's campaign to demonstrate that the quality of life was improving. Last month during September, about 100 Iraqi journalists had a protest of growing restrictions on their work, shouting: "No, no to muzzling; yes, yes to freedom!"
This news was interesting to me because this kind of rediculous thing will not happen in America. Who would dare to arrest a journalist for taking a picture of LA's or NewYork City's traffic jam? I guess if this report by Joel Brinkley is true, America is a true democratic nation. News medias are busy trying to disgrace political figures (like Fox news).
Monday, October 12, 2009
Obama administration VS. Fox News
From http://www.tvguide.com/News/ Posted Oct. 12, 2009 By Douglas J. Rowe
The news I found in www.tvguide.com talked about the frustration between the Obama administration and the Fox news. The Obama administration says it's treating Fox News Channel as a political opponent. White House communications director Anita Dunn recently told Time magazine that she thinks the channel offers "opinion journalism masquerading as news," Also, the Times reported that the White House is limiting its members' appearances on Fox News. Last month (During September), when President Barack Obama himself made the rounds of Sunday morning talk shows, he skipped Fox. Someone quoted "They're (White House) more worried about the war on Fox than the actual war in Afghanistan." In Fox new's side, Fox's senior vice president Michael Clemente, issued a statement Monday "It's astounding the White House can't distinguish between news and opinion programming. It seems self-serving on their part." Also, Fox's senior vice president for programming, Bill Shine, told the Times every time the White House criticizes the Fox, "our ratings go up." Which is true Fox got a record of 1.2 million average viewers up from 1 million last year.
I think that it is amazing that just a media news channel is fighting against a government. Fox News is, along with CNN are very well known in South Korea too (even though we don't watch it). Even though this is very famous media, I don't know if Fox News can fight against the government. Government may make regulations, laws that would be very disadvantageous to Fox News. But It is very ironic that whenever the White House criticize Fox News, their viewers go up. Fox news had its highest average number of viewers ever since 2003, the starting Iraq war. I can't believe that Americans are more interested in news thats against the government than the actual war. The power of media is so amazing and powerful that it can make negative points of the government and show it to 1.2 million people. I wonder what those 1.2 millions people who have watched Fox News will now think of the government.
The news I found in www.tvguide.com talked about the frustration between the Obama administration and the Fox news. The Obama administration says it's treating Fox News Channel as a political opponent. White House communications director Anita Dunn recently told Time magazine that she thinks the channel offers "opinion journalism masquerading as news," Also, the Times reported that the White House is limiting its members' appearances on Fox News. Last month (During September), when President Barack Obama himself made the rounds of Sunday morning talk shows, he skipped Fox. Someone quoted "They're (White House) more worried about the war on Fox than the actual war in Afghanistan." In Fox new's side, Fox's senior vice president Michael Clemente, issued a statement Monday "It's astounding the White House can't distinguish between news and opinion programming. It seems self-serving on their part." Also, Fox's senior vice president for programming, Bill Shine, told the Times every time the White House criticizes the Fox, "our ratings go up." Which is true Fox got a record of 1.2 million average viewers up from 1 million last year.
I think that it is amazing that just a media news channel is fighting against a government. Fox News is, along with CNN are very well known in South Korea too (even though we don't watch it). Even though this is very famous media, I don't know if Fox News can fight against the government. Government may make regulations, laws that would be very disadvantageous to Fox News. But It is very ironic that whenever the White House criticize Fox News, their viewers go up. Fox news had its highest average number of viewers ever since 2003, the starting Iraq war. I can't believe that Americans are more interested in news thats against the government than the actual war. The power of media is so amazing and powerful that it can make negative points of the government and show it to 1.2 million people. I wonder what those 1.2 millions people who have watched Fox News will now think of the government.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
candidate for Montreal Mayor frustrated in lack of media's attention
News from CBC, updated September 27th
Montreal mayoralty candidate Louise O'Sullivan expressed frustration at the lack of media's attention at her campaign. O'Sullivan has formed her own party, called Montreal Ville-Marie but she has not been invited to take part in any of the televised debates. She quoted, "We are the real alternative, I'm appalled that they're not giving us a platform to share our ideas."
Well, this new i got from CBC was very short. All I summerized was basically everything written. There was not a single reason why she did not get any attention so I wonder why she really doesn't get any attention from media. Maybe because I think, as the "depiction analysis" suggest, media only talks about things/issues that will bring them some money and perhaps medias don't think writing about Louise O'Sullivan is not profitable. Ironically, Sullivan's frustration about the lack of attention from media finally gave her some attention because at least CBC news talked about it (even though this article was very short).
Montreal mayoralty candidate Louise O'Sullivan expressed frustration at the lack of media's attention at her campaign. O'Sullivan has formed her own party, called Montreal Ville-Marie but she has not been invited to take part in any of the televised debates. She quoted, "We are the real alternative, I'm appalled that they're not giving us a platform to share our ideas."
Well, this new i got from CBC was very short. All I summerized was basically everything written. There was not a single reason why she did not get any attention so I wonder why she really doesn't get any attention from media. Maybe because I think, as the "depiction analysis" suggest, media only talks about things/issues that will bring them some money and perhaps medias don't think writing about Louise O'Sullivan is not profitable. Ironically, Sullivan's frustration about the lack of attention from media finally gave her some attention because at least CBC news talked about it (even though this article was very short).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)