It has been 24 hours and Angela Melissa Norton is still missing with no new reports on her whereabouts.
Police are questioning the babysitter and parents. They have also knocked on every door in the six-block area in the Norton's neighborhood to see if anyone has seen or heard something.
Maria L. Norton, the mother or Angela, issued this plea when she met with reporters.
"We are begging anyone who might have seen our daughter to please call the police or us," she said. "She has never been away from home without us, and we are certain that she must be terrified not to be in her own home."
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Al Jazeera
1.How effective do you think the Internet will be for Al Jazeera as it attempts to reach a U.S. audience?
I think that the internet is an extremely useful venue for Al Jazeera to reach an American audience.First of all, one is able to access the news station at any time with it's streaming of videos.Having that luxury is extremely convenient for anyone with a busy schedule that doesn't have time to tune into news channels. The internet is a growing venue that many Americans easily have access to. Even though Al Jazeera doesn't have the backing of any networks, I still think their voice will be heard over the internet.
2. Based on your own observations, do you think that Al Jazeera English should be allowed to broadcast in the U.S.?
Based on my watching of the news channel, I don't see the harm in airing Al Jazeera on American t.v. I think that as Americans, our news is very slanted, and I didn't even realize the lack of world perspective that we had in our news until I watched some Al Jazeera. When talking about Obama's speech on peace between Israel and Palestine, Al Jazeera gave perspectives from people in both Jerusalem and Palestine. I feel like sometimes we are lacking a world perspective. I do understand that sometimes the perspective of AL Jazeera can be skewed against Americans, but it is impossible to be completely unbiased about issues, and the only way for people to make up their own mind, is if they are offered many different perspectives.
3.What, if anything, do you notice about Al Jazeera's approach to telling the news? How is it different than the U.S.-based TV news outlets that you have experienced?
The reporters were very careful with the way they worded things. The mention of Barack Obama was completely neutral, so there was no positive or negative spin on his speech. They also didn't show the opinions of American politicians about his speech. I feel that oftentimes a network will report on a speech by the President and then show a clip of what the political opposition has to say about it. Al Jazeera does a much better job of staying neutral because they don't have the pressure from sponsors and networks' political convictions.
4. While on the Al Jazeera site, be sure to check out the network's published Code of Ethics. Based on your own observations, do you think they are adhering to them?
After reviewing the code of ethics, I think Al Jazeera does a good job adhering to them. As I have stated before, I think that it is impossible to be completely objective on an issue, and it was evident in some of the reporters, that they had opinions and biases. That aside, I think Al Jazeera did an excellent job at "distinguishing between news material, opinion and analysis to avoid the pitfalls of speculation and propaganda."
I think that the internet is an extremely useful venue for Al Jazeera to reach an American audience.First of all, one is able to access the news station at any time with it's streaming of videos.Having that luxury is extremely convenient for anyone with a busy schedule that doesn't have time to tune into news channels. The internet is a growing venue that many Americans easily have access to. Even though Al Jazeera doesn't have the backing of any networks, I still think their voice will be heard over the internet.
2. Based on your own observations, do you think that Al Jazeera English should be allowed to broadcast in the U.S.?
Based on my watching of the news channel, I don't see the harm in airing Al Jazeera on American t.v. I think that as Americans, our news is very slanted, and I didn't even realize the lack of world perspective that we had in our news until I watched some Al Jazeera. When talking about Obama's speech on peace between Israel and Palestine, Al Jazeera gave perspectives from people in both Jerusalem and Palestine. I feel like sometimes we are lacking a world perspective. I do understand that sometimes the perspective of AL Jazeera can be skewed against Americans, but it is impossible to be completely unbiased about issues, and the only way for people to make up their own mind, is if they are offered many different perspectives.
3.What, if anything, do you notice about Al Jazeera's approach to telling the news? How is it different than the U.S.-based TV news outlets that you have experienced?
The reporters were very careful with the way they worded things. The mention of Barack Obama was completely neutral, so there was no positive or negative spin on his speech. They also didn't show the opinions of American politicians about his speech. I feel that oftentimes a network will report on a speech by the President and then show a clip of what the political opposition has to say about it. Al Jazeera does a much better job of staying neutral because they don't have the pressure from sponsors and networks' political convictions.
4. While on the Al Jazeera site, be sure to check out the network's published Code of Ethics. Based on your own observations, do you think they are adhering to them?
After reviewing the code of ethics, I think Al Jazeera does a good job adhering to them. As I have stated before, I think that it is impossible to be completely objective on an issue, and it was evident in some of the reporters, that they had opinions and biases. That aside, I think Al Jazeera did an excellent job at "distinguishing between news material, opinion and analysis to avoid the pitfalls of speculation and propaganda."
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Summary News Lead
"Four months after a torrent of water from a broken city water main rushed through her rental house in Ravenna, Lynn Potthoff is still negotiating with Seattle officials over damage costs."
This is an example of a summary news lead because it is a single paragraph consisting of at least 35 words. The verb in the lead, "rushed" expresses the what of the story. It conveys to the reader that this woman's house was flooded. The verb is also placed toward the beginning of the lead. The verb is in active instead of passive voice. The lead also gives the reader an indication of the "who" in the story is by listing the name of the woman affected by the flooding. The lead also gives the reader the "what," "why," "where" and "how" of the story.
What- Potthoff is negotiating with Seattle officials damage costs of her home
Why- Her rental house was flooded
How- A city water main broke causing the flood
Where- Ravenna
Sunday, September 13, 2009
3 Pitches
Here are three wonderfully creative ideas for my first story assignment in J-305:
1. Greek Centennial week- It is the 100th anniversary of Greek life at Washington State University. For my story I would like to find out exactly what this means for the Greek community. Why is it such a big landmark? What has Panhellenic and IFC done to commemorate the event? Do they feel it will be successful?
Contacts: Elizabeth Boss: VP Media Relations and Brittany Koehler VP Programming
2. Project Give: ASWSU has decided to give back to the Pullman community by getting WSU students involved in a campus-wide community service project. I want to find out the exact plans for this project. How do they think they will get students to participate? What makes this community service opportunity so unique? I also want to get the inside story from the new director of philanthropy and community outreach, since last year he was at first denied his position by the ASWSU senate. Now that he has been approved I want to know if it affects what and how he does his job.
Contacts: Edison Kent director of philanthropy and community outreach, Jay Hendrickson, ASWSU VP
3. Rock the CASA: Kappa Alpha Theta holds a benefit concert for their charity, Court Appointed Special Advocates. Last year was the first time holding the concert, and I want to find out what this year will be like. Are the people in charge of it nervous that it won't be as successful? What were some of the challenges of planning it? Why will students enjoy the event?
Contacts: Hannah Fanslow, philanthropy chair this year, Katie Ireland philanthropy chair, last year.
1. Greek Centennial week- It is the 100th anniversary of Greek life at Washington State University. For my story I would like to find out exactly what this means for the Greek community. Why is it such a big landmark? What has Panhellenic and IFC done to commemorate the event? Do they feel it will be successful?
Contacts: Elizabeth Boss: VP Media Relations and Brittany Koehler VP Programming
2. Project Give: ASWSU has decided to give back to the Pullman community by getting WSU students involved in a campus-wide community service project. I want to find out the exact plans for this project. How do they think they will get students to participate? What makes this community service opportunity so unique? I also want to get the inside story from the new director of philanthropy and community outreach, since last year he was at first denied his position by the ASWSU senate. Now that he has been approved I want to know if it affects what and how he does his job.
Contacts: Edison Kent director of philanthropy and community outreach, Jay Hendrickson, ASWSU VP
3. Rock the CASA: Kappa Alpha Theta holds a benefit concert for their charity, Court Appointed Special Advocates. Last year was the first time holding the concert, and I want to find out what this year will be like. Are the people in charge of it nervous that it won't be as successful? What were some of the challenges of planning it? Why will students enjoy the event?
Contacts: Hannah Fanslow, philanthropy chair this year, Katie Ireland philanthropy chair, last year.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Traditional Journalism
Watching both videos on the Chevron Texaco Ecuador lawsuit, it became very clear how one issue can be presented in vastly different ways. While I found the 60 minutes clip to be much more credible and less biased than the second, I still don't feel that traditional journalism is represented in either of the videos.
Traditional journalism is defined as remaining neutral at any cost. It should be noted that the 60 minutes video does present both sides of the issue and makes an effort to interview people within the Chevron company, but it is still very clear throughout the video that they have some bias toward Ecuador.
The other video cannot be considered traditional journalism because it isn't even real journalism. As pointed out in the New York Times article, the video was posted on youtube, not a credible website, and it was a reporter hired by the company who investigated for the video. It is more of a PR campaign than a journalistic piece. The video doesn't even pretend to be neutral, it is so completely biased. Only Chevron employed scientists, environmentalists...are interviewed, and not one person from the opposing side actually talks to the reporter. It is the same story skewed in a completely different way.
I am not sure traditional journalism can ever be followed because it is hard to be completely unbiased about any issue, but the 60 minutes video clearly presents both sides of the issue, while the second video fails to do so.
Traditional journalism is defined as remaining neutral at any cost. It should be noted that the 60 minutes video does present both sides of the issue and makes an effort to interview people within the Chevron company, but it is still very clear throughout the video that they have some bias toward Ecuador.
The other video cannot be considered traditional journalism because it isn't even real journalism. As pointed out in the New York Times article, the video was posted on youtube, not a credible website, and it was a reporter hired by the company who investigated for the video. It is more of a PR campaign than a journalistic piece. The video doesn't even pretend to be neutral, it is so completely biased. Only Chevron employed scientists, environmentalists...are interviewed, and not one person from the opposing side actually talks to the reporter. It is the same story skewed in a completely different way.
I am not sure traditional journalism can ever be followed because it is hard to be completely unbiased about any issue, but the 60 minutes video clearly presents both sides of the issue, while the second video fails to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
