The article being discussed can be found here.
Trump has been losing support of evangelicals quickly after the leaking of the Access Hollywood tape. This article (collection of articles?) says "not all of us are like this!" when talking about the Trump phenomenon. While I think this is true, evangelicals lean overwhelmingly to the right, and some even could be considered far-right. While the article says they can't support him because of his comments on women, my question is, why is it all of a sudden you stop supporting Trump after he insults your wife, sister, or daughter? While this article tries to pin it on Trump's raging crusade for the Presidency, hurtling over practically weekly scandal leaks, I think it is also, to some degree, the fact that white women are being attacked now, not Muslims, African-Americans, or another racial or ethnic minority.
Monday, October 24, 2016
Response to Courier-Journal Article #1
The article being discussed can be found here.
This Courier-Journal article violated the yardstick of fairness because it is implicitly biased in favor of Sen. Rand Paul. While there was no specific mention of support, it is obvious the author of the article supports him. As this is a news story, it is not supposed to be an opinion piece. However, it certainly seems like an opinion that Rand Paul is a "small-government, liberty-loving, anti-interventionist". While the small government part is almost unarguably true, the other two are opinions that really shouldn't be used to describe the subject of the article. If I had written the article, I would have used "self-declared" before listing the aforementioned traits.
This Courier-Journal article violated the yardstick of fairness because it is implicitly biased in favor of Sen. Rand Paul. While there was no specific mention of support, it is obvious the author of the article supports him. As this is a news story, it is not supposed to be an opinion piece. However, it certainly seems like an opinion that Rand Paul is a "small-government, liberty-loving, anti-interventionist". While the small government part is almost unarguably true, the other two are opinions that really shouldn't be used to describe the subject of the article. If I had written the article, I would have used "self-declared" before listing the aforementioned traits.
Response to Lauren's Blog: News Media Critique #3
Lauren's post can be found here.
After reading Lauren's critique of the Courier-Journal, I really agree with what she is saying about the website design flaws. In the past, I had never really noticed that they immediately asked you to subscribe after clicking on their website. While I know newspapers are struggling now, I agree that it seems awfully forceful to say "Subscribe to us!" before the user even clicks on an article. I think this would be an important thing for them to change.
Great blog, Lauren!
After reading Lauren's critique of the Courier-Journal, I really agree with what she is saying about the website design flaws. In the past, I had never really noticed that they immediately asked you to subscribe after clicking on their website. While I know newspapers are struggling now, I agree that it seems awfully forceful to say "Subscribe to us!" before the user even clicks on an article. I think this would be an important thing for them to change.
Great blog, Lauren!
Response to WLKY Article #2
This WLKY Article can be found here.
I'm writing about this article because it seems to be biased against Sen. Tim Kaine, and is not in the editorials. The headline itself, "Vice Presidential Nominee Shrugs Off Threat By WikiLeaks" might not be so bad, but throughout the news article, it repeatedly uses the term "shrugged off". Using this term makes it seem like he is deliberately ignoring something that should be taken very seriously. However, it seems Sen. Kaine simply does not believe there is a threat. The author of this article also uses small phrases that don't seem biased in and of themselves, but the frequency of them is appalling. If it were truly a well written article, the author wouldn't repeatedly use the term "shrugged off", instead saying something along the lines of "Kaine sees threats as unfounded".
I'm writing about this article because it seems to be biased against Sen. Tim Kaine, and is not in the editorials. The headline itself, "Vice Presidential Nominee Shrugs Off Threat By WikiLeaks" might not be so bad, but throughout the news article, it repeatedly uses the term "shrugged off". Using this term makes it seem like he is deliberately ignoring something that should be taken very seriously. However, it seems Sen. Kaine simply does not believe there is a threat. The author of this article also uses small phrases that don't seem biased in and of themselves, but the frequency of them is appalling. If it were truly a well written article, the author wouldn't repeatedly use the term "shrugged off", instead saying something along the lines of "Kaine sees threats as unfounded".
Response to Maddie's Blog: The Effects of T.V.
Maddie's blog post can be found here.
I thought Maddie's posts shared some interesting insight into how TV has changed our everyday lives. I also agree with what she said about the cost of TV ads and how that affects our political world. Because the ads are so expensive to run, it makes it nearly impossible for political candidates to not accept corporate money. One of the main reasons Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign was so successful is because people know and understand money corrupts good people. The money donated by corporations is also a good way to see which industries a candidate has pandered to, because they don't just donate money to be nice. They want something in it for themselves.
Overall, I really like Maddie's blog, especially this post. It shows she understand and has developed opinions on TV's effects on our past and present. Great job, Maddie!
I thought Maddie's posts shared some interesting insight into how TV has changed our everyday lives. I also agree with what she said about the cost of TV ads and how that affects our political world. Because the ads are so expensive to run, it makes it nearly impossible for political candidates to not accept corporate money. One of the main reasons Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign was so successful is because people know and understand money corrupts good people. The money donated by corporations is also a good way to see which industries a candidate has pandered to, because they don't just donate money to be nice. They want something in it for themselves.
Overall, I really like Maddie's blog, especially this post. It shows she understand and has developed opinions on TV's effects on our past and present. Great job, Maddie!
Saturday, October 22, 2016
Response to WLKY Article #1
The article being discussed can be found here.
While this article gave me a good laugh, it wasn't newsworthy or very interesting. This seems more like something you'd tell your family over dinner, not publish on a major news outlet. Honestly, I was surprised someone mistook a wolf for a dog, as not only is their behavior different, but they often look different as well.
When the article said "He'd dig under or jump over the fence to play with the neighbors' German Shepherds, and when the owner installed a bigger barrier, the animal just chewed through it. Caught visiting next door, he didn't respond to treats and avoided eye contact." I thought it would have been a dead giveaway for them. However, it wasn't, apparently.
While I think this was a funny story, it wasn't newsworthy at all and shouldn't be on WLKY. It's not something most people need or want to know about, so there's no reason for it to be published.
While this article gave me a good laugh, it wasn't newsworthy or very interesting. This seems more like something you'd tell your family over dinner, not publish on a major news outlet. Honestly, I was surprised someone mistook a wolf for a dog, as not only is their behavior different, but they often look different as well.
When the article said "He'd dig under or jump over the fence to play with the neighbors' German Shepherds, and when the owner installed a bigger barrier, the animal just chewed through it. Caught visiting next door, he didn't respond to treats and avoided eye contact." I thought it would have been a dead giveaway for them. However, it wasn't, apparently.
While I think this was a funny story, it wasn't newsworthy at all and shouldn't be on WLKY. It's not something most people need or want to know about, so there's no reason for it to be published.
Friday, September 16, 2016
Class Response: Test Review
Jeopardy in class was a great way to review for our test. It helped me understand the topics even better than after doing regular studying. Even though it got a little competitive (red team for life), it was super helpful and I wish more classes did it.
The game also helped me better understand the ten elements and seven yardsticks of journalism. I had trouble remembering them before the test, but now I think they're pretty easy.
I hope Mr. Miller does more stuff like this with us in the future, because it really helps me internalize the information. When I'm under pressure, I'm very productive, so things like Kahoot and Jeopardy are fun to do.
I think I'll do well on this journalism test, thanks to Mr. Miller's lectures and his review game. Kudos to you, Mr. Miller.
The game also helped me better understand the ten elements and seven yardsticks of journalism. I had trouble remembering them before the test, but now I think they're pretty easy.
I hope Mr. Miller does more stuff like this with us in the future, because it really helps me internalize the information. When I'm under pressure, I'm very productive, so things like Kahoot and Jeopardy are fun to do.
I think I'll do well on this journalism test, thanks to Mr. Miller's lectures and his review game. Kudos to you, Mr. Miller.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)