1. Should NBC News have aired any of the footage? Some of the footage? How should that be determined?
I personally believe they should have aired it. It fell in their lap, it had huge news value, and people want to know about it. Based on the fact of whether or not people should be exposed to it is their own personal decision. If someone does not want to watch it they do not HAVE to watch it. I didn't see the actual video, so I don't know if there was anything outrageous that would be hard for anybody to watch, but if there was not I don't see any reason to not have aired the footage. Also, you have to think if you were in that situation and you had this huge news story, you would probably air it, because there is nothing seriously unethical about it in my mind.
2. As a journalist, what are the ethical considerations in determining coverage of this controversial content?
Some things that come to my mind are whether or not this video footage will give ideas to other people looking for attention and who want to mimic what the killer did. They could use the video to try and get attention and commit a crime themselves. Another ethical consideration is taking into account the victims and their families and friends. They may not want this story to keep being told on the news with video footage of the killer being shown over and over. Many average viewers may also want to just forget this and put it behind them, so that they are not dwelling on it. The last consideration that I can think of is the fact that NBC could profit from this. Of course, I don't see a way around them making a profit, but you have to ask if they should have the right to make all the profit off of this tragic story and video.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Final Story, Feature Lead
It was late in March, six months into the school year, and like many college freshmen Erin McCormick was driving her Dodge Neon without the supervision of her parents. It was extremely hot outside, and she was not familiar with the necessary steps to maintain a car.
“I honestly had no idea that I was supposed to do things to keep my car from breaking down,” said McCormick. “I had driven it for over a year by this point.”
McCormick’s car started overheating on a regular basis, and she took it in to get looked at.
“It started overheating after a half-hour of driving, so I decided something was wrong,” she said.
Many students leaving home for the first time are not taught what is necessary to maintain their cars. Students often drive more miles, and driving without ever having the oil changed can damage the engine.
“You should change your oil roughly every 3,000 miles, or after three months when it starts to get old,” said Allyn Van Hout, assistant manager of Jiffy Lube in Pullman. “After a while the oil starts building composites in the engine which is bad.”
“I’ve had people bring in their cars where the oil is black, or where there are actually only a few drops of oil in the car,” said Van Hout. “If you run completely out of oil it can destroy your engine.”
Clean oil is a clear tan color, said Van Hout. When it gets old it turns to a dark black color.
“I’ve had people laugh about it when I tell them how close they were to destroying their engine,” said Van Hout. “I try to explain to them that they could be paying thousands of dollars in engine repairs for not changing their oil.”
In some of these cases the car’s owners are college students that are unaware of the fact that the oil needs to be changed, said Van Hout.
This was exactly the case in McCormick’s situation.
“When I took my car in I told them I had never changed the oil before,” said McCormick. “Good thing I took it in when I did and nothing happened to my car.”
Van Hout said that changing oil is a universal need for all cars.
“It is the one thing that every car needs to have done,” Van Hout said. “It is the easiest thing to do that every car needs.”
As for other maintenance tips for college students with their own cars, follow the manufacturers recommendations for tune-ups based on the vehicles current mileage, said Van Hout.
“A higher mileage car might require more frequent changes or tune-ups based on the make and model,” said Van Hout.
“I knew a lot of people who didn’t change their oil regularly either,” said McCormick. “I make sure to tell my friends when they get a new car.”
“I’m never going to forget again,” said McCormick. “It was pretty embarrassing when my car started smoking on the highway.”
“I honestly had no idea that I was supposed to do things to keep my car from breaking down,” said McCormick. “I had driven it for over a year by this point.”
McCormick’s car started overheating on a regular basis, and she took it in to get looked at.
“It started overheating after a half-hour of driving, so I decided something was wrong,” she said.
Many students leaving home for the first time are not taught what is necessary to maintain their cars. Students often drive more miles, and driving without ever having the oil changed can damage the engine.
“You should change your oil roughly every 3,000 miles, or after three months when it starts to get old,” said Allyn Van Hout, assistant manager of Jiffy Lube in Pullman. “After a while the oil starts building composites in the engine which is bad.”
“I’ve had people bring in their cars where the oil is black, or where there are actually only a few drops of oil in the car,” said Van Hout. “If you run completely out of oil it can destroy your engine.”
Clean oil is a clear tan color, said Van Hout. When it gets old it turns to a dark black color.
“I’ve had people laugh about it when I tell them how close they were to destroying their engine,” said Van Hout. “I try to explain to them that they could be paying thousands of dollars in engine repairs for not changing their oil.”
In some of these cases the car’s owners are college students that are unaware of the fact that the oil needs to be changed, said Van Hout.
This was exactly the case in McCormick’s situation.
“When I took my car in I told them I had never changed the oil before,” said McCormick. “Good thing I took it in when I did and nothing happened to my car.”
Van Hout said that changing oil is a universal need for all cars.
“It is the one thing that every car needs to have done,” Van Hout said. “It is the easiest thing to do that every car needs.”
As for other maintenance tips for college students with their own cars, follow the manufacturers recommendations for tune-ups based on the vehicles current mileage, said Van Hout.
“A higher mileage car might require more frequent changes or tune-ups based on the make and model,” said Van Hout.
“I knew a lot of people who didn’t change their oil regularly either,” said McCormick. “I make sure to tell my friends when they get a new car.”
“I’m never going to forget again,” said McCormick. “It was pretty embarrassing when my car started smoking on the highway.”
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Press Conference Article
Rolling Stone Radio, a new streaming internet music service, was unveiled by RealNetworks and Rolling Stone during a press conference earlier today at Washington State University.
Rolling Stone Radio is a streaming radio service that will be available free of charge and feature 12 channels at launch today, said Brett Atwood, editor of music services for RealNetworks.
RealNetworks, a pioneer of streaming audio and video based in Seattle, anticipates this service will be the top music service within a year, said Atwood. The radio service is the result of a partnership between the trusted and established music magazine Rolling Stone and technology company RealNetworks, he said.
“Rolling Stone Radio is democratic,” said Atwood. Users will be able to switch instantly between 12 channels and rate songs that they listen to on a scale of one to five, he said.
For example, if the user tunes into a rock station but does not like the song that is playing, that person may choose to give it a low rating, which will be collected by the programmers at Rolling Stone who will adjust the playlist accordingly, Atwood said.
“We think the internet audience will respond well,” he said.
“This is going to be the year when Internet radio emerges from the shadows into the mainstream. This could become a truly mass medium … and when that happens, radio as we know it will cease to exist,” said Seema Williams, analyst at Forrester Research.
Other features include uncensored rap and hip hop, along with the ability to instantly buy any song from Amazon.com.
An exclusive David Bowie channel is anticipated in the next month, which will be programmed and hosted by Bowie himself, said Atwood. “We believe this is the first of what will be several artist specific channels,” he said.
"As DJ for the BowieNet radio station on Rolling Stone Radio, my first playlist will include favorite songs from the last five decades. I'm hoping music fans all over the world tune in and join me," said David Bowie.
Rolling Stone Radio will also feature significantly less commercial advertising than traditional radio, roughly three to four minutes per hour of music, said Atwood.
Atwood believes Rolling Stone Radio will penetrate the internet audience quickly. “We think within a year’s time we will be a leader of internet radio.”
Rolling Stone Radio is a streaming radio service that will be available free of charge and feature 12 channels at launch today, said Brett Atwood, editor of music services for RealNetworks.
RealNetworks, a pioneer of streaming audio and video based in Seattle, anticipates this service will be the top music service within a year, said Atwood. The radio service is the result of a partnership between the trusted and established music magazine Rolling Stone and technology company RealNetworks, he said.
“Rolling Stone Radio is democratic,” said Atwood. Users will be able to switch instantly between 12 channels and rate songs that they listen to on a scale of one to five, he said.
For example, if the user tunes into a rock station but does not like the song that is playing, that person may choose to give it a low rating, which will be collected by the programmers at Rolling Stone who will adjust the playlist accordingly, Atwood said.
“We think the internet audience will respond well,” he said.
“This is going to be the year when Internet radio emerges from the shadows into the mainstream. This could become a truly mass medium … and when that happens, radio as we know it will cease to exist,” said Seema Williams, analyst at Forrester Research.
Other features include uncensored rap and hip hop, along with the ability to instantly buy any song from Amazon.com.
An exclusive David Bowie channel is anticipated in the next month, which will be programmed and hosted by Bowie himself, said Atwood. “We believe this is the first of what will be several artist specific channels,” he said.
"As DJ for the BowieNet radio station on Rolling Stone Radio, my first playlist will include favorite songs from the last five decades. I'm hoping music fans all over the world tune in and join me," said David Bowie.
Rolling Stone Radio will also feature significantly less commercial advertising than traditional radio, roughly three to four minutes per hour of music, said Atwood.
Atwood believes Rolling Stone Radio will penetrate the internet audience quickly. “We think within a year’s time we will be a leader of internet radio.”
1) Steven Smith said there is no story if he is not trying to engage in sexual activity with underage men because then there is no illegal activity for being gay. He said the mayor may be a dirty old man, but still would not be committing a crime if he is simply gay and not having sex with minors.
2) He justified the sting operation by saying they needed to search for the truth. He didn't create the fake username on the gay chat room because he said it is against the rules and code of ethics of the Spokesman Review for him to use a fake identity.
3) I think they published so many because more and more information kept unraveling, and it was a very big story about an anti-gay mayor who may be gay, so people would keep reading it and buying newspapers. Also he said the papers were wrong at first, so they had to continue investigating the story.
4) If anyone benefitted, it would be the newspaper, and also victims of past sexual assaults because it may have brought them closure. However, we don't know for sure that he was a child molestor so it is hard to say if he really hurt anyone.
As for who was hurt, clearly the Mayor Jim West was hurt since his reputation was destroyed and his career was ended very rapidly. Also he had hidden his gay sexuality and had been anti-gay throughout his career, which made him appear to be a hypocrite.
I don't believe it was entirely worth it, although it was a huge story for the city of Spokane. There was never really proof that he was a child molestor, and all he did was be a gay person, but hide it. He felt he needed to hide it to advance high in his career, and it all came to an end after the truth came out. Maybe if it were shown that he had been a child molestor and hurt underaged peoples lives it would have been more worth it. If it were a janitor who happened to be gay, and people found out he was gay, but was not committing illegal activities, nobody would probably think twice about the situation.
5) I think there could possibly be some ethics issues in this article, because there is no proof of any illegal activities going on, just speculation and unusual events like his private vehicle being spotted in a bad neighborhood. I think the Spokesman-review should have continued investigating, and if they had found anything factual, it would have made for a much more legitimate story to be published at a later time. There could possibly be legitimate explanations for all these events, but as a political figure he will be under constant scrutiny which is unfair.
2) He justified the sting operation by saying they needed to search for the truth. He didn't create the fake username on the gay chat room because he said it is against the rules and code of ethics of the Spokesman Review for him to use a fake identity.
3) I think they published so many because more and more information kept unraveling, and it was a very big story about an anti-gay mayor who may be gay, so people would keep reading it and buying newspapers. Also he said the papers were wrong at first, so they had to continue investigating the story.
4) If anyone benefitted, it would be the newspaper, and also victims of past sexual assaults because it may have brought them closure. However, we don't know for sure that he was a child molestor so it is hard to say if he really hurt anyone.
As for who was hurt, clearly the Mayor Jim West was hurt since his reputation was destroyed and his career was ended very rapidly. Also he had hidden his gay sexuality and had been anti-gay throughout his career, which made him appear to be a hypocrite.
I don't believe it was entirely worth it, although it was a huge story for the city of Spokane. There was never really proof that he was a child molestor, and all he did was be a gay person, but hide it. He felt he needed to hide it to advance high in his career, and it all came to an end after the truth came out. Maybe if it were shown that he had been a child molestor and hurt underaged peoples lives it would have been more worth it. If it were a janitor who happened to be gay, and people found out he was gay, but was not committing illegal activities, nobody would probably think twice about the situation.
5) I think there could possibly be some ethics issues in this article, because there is no proof of any illegal activities going on, just speculation and unusual events like his private vehicle being spotted in a bad neighborhood. I think the Spokesman-review should have continued investigating, and if they had found anything factual, it would have made for a much more legitimate story to be published at a later time. There could possibly be legitimate explanations for all these events, but as a political figure he will be under constant scrutiny which is unfair.
Monday, April 2, 2007
The News Aggregators
Both sites are similar in that they are very simply laid out, and have many links everywhere that you can click. I noticed on the Huffington Post that there are clearly labeled blogs with headlines as many of the links, whereas the Drudge Report has mostly links to other news sites, and none of the headlines are actually blogs. I think the Drudge Report is less cluttered and easier to navigate.
The Huffington Reports top headlines seem to focus more on government related issues such as presidential candidates and government decisions. The Drudge Report, however, seems more balanced in that it is not all political headlines. My immediate impression is that the Drudge Report is much more balanced like a mainstream news site such as cnn, because their top headlines range from the murder-suicide at UW, to a dry spell in Los Angeles, and a story about Anna Nicole Smith.
As for political affiliation or bias, I cannot really see any obvious signs of bias, however if I had to choose one I would say they both lean slightly left, but I only say that based off of a couple of the current headlines, although I could very likely be wrong since I don't know that much about politics. I basically could not find any hard evidence to choose one.
On the Drudge Report, the headlines for most of the stories match the actual story, except that some of the headlines have been changed on the Druge Report website. The Huffington Report was similar in that the headlines were what the stories were actually about, but slightly changed.
I don't know if these sites have the power to influence the public, because I personally don't know anybody that reads them. However, if their readership is as high as some people claim, I suppose it is possible.
The Huffington Reports top headlines seem to focus more on government related issues such as presidential candidates and government decisions. The Drudge Report, however, seems more balanced in that it is not all political headlines. My immediate impression is that the Drudge Report is much more balanced like a mainstream news site such as cnn, because their top headlines range from the murder-suicide at UW, to a dry spell in Los Angeles, and a story about Anna Nicole Smith.
As for political affiliation or bias, I cannot really see any obvious signs of bias, however if I had to choose one I would say they both lean slightly left, but I only say that based off of a couple of the current headlines, although I could very likely be wrong since I don't know that much about politics. I basically could not find any hard evidence to choose one.
On the Drudge Report, the headlines for most of the stories match the actual story, except that some of the headlines have been changed on the Druge Report website. The Huffington Report was similar in that the headlines were what the stories were actually about, but slightly changed.
I don't know if these sites have the power to influence the public, because I personally don't know anybody that reads them. However, if their readership is as high as some people claim, I suppose it is possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)