I believe that the definition of an “act of journalism” is subjective.    

And I think that your general attitude about the state of our current news journalism industry has a direct correlation to your belief that blogs provide “real news” and can be considered an act of journalism.   

            The older American demographics may still be living in the dark ages of news consumerism.  For example: religiously watching local news and NBC’s Nightly News with Brian Williams, reminiscing on the glory days of Walter Cronkite, and reading the morning print newspaper’s headlines.  This generation still believes in and consumes their news through traditional media outlets.  These citizens are not apt to subscribe to a reader, search political speeches on YouTube, or scroll through their preferred online news site, let alone attempt to access blogs.  They still hold a positive view of traditional media and may not consider blogging true journalism.  

            On the other hand, the younger generations, the Americans who grew up with the technology silver spoon in their mouths, not only distrust the traditional news media outlets, they are familiar and confident with online news and technology.  They would hold a positive view of personal journalism and may consider blogging to be a better news source.  This is reflected in O’Reilly’s Chapter 7, which explains how “the grassroots have emerged, in ways the professional media largely still fail to comprehend, as a genuine force in journalism.” 

            I don’t think that there is any denial that “for the first time in modern history, the user is truly in charge” or that “blogs can be acts of civic engagement.”  (O’Reilly, Chapter 7)   It is just a matter of people’s attitudes toward this form of journalism.  In order to consider blogging an act of journalism, it faces the challenge of trust and participation.  A large number of citizens must gain faith in and actively participate in widespread blogging. 

For now, the answer to our question will remain subjective, based upon attitude and experience with different forms of journalism.  But I do believe that it is just a matter of time for blogging to be considered an act of journalism.

- When do you perceive this widespread paradigm shift to viewing blogging as an act of journalism to begin?   5 years, 10 years, 20 years?  Why did you choose your timeframe? 

- Why do you view blogging as an act of journalism?  Do you think that your response contributes to your generation’s culture? 

This week, Professor Gill poses the questions: What are social media?  How have they changed the relationship between media outlet and audience?
            I would like to address the arena of social media called Facebook.  Facebook has added a whole other dimension of relationship between media outlets and audiences.  This new format of media have widened the two way street of accessibility between media outlets and audiences.  Media outlets can gather and disseminate stories more quickly and easily through this new social media form and audiences can access, absorb, and even provide stories in the same way.    

For example, a recent news story states that Facebook profiles have been under watchful eyes of employers looking for new hires.  Recent graduates have been encouraged to clean up their profiles meaning removing any suggestions of foul behavior, alcohol, crude lingo, scandalous pictures, revealing clothing etc.  It amazes me that this new form of social media provides employers with an entirely new screening process for job applicants.  I experienced this when I was applying to Komo 4 TV for an internship last year.  I was invited to “befriend”, or allow viewing access of my profile, to one of the past interns in the office.  I had never met this other intern before and it was obvious that they were befriending me to prescreen my professionalism for the older bosses of the office who were not Facebook members.  Stories found in and about Facebook are more prevalent forcing the media outlets to have a hand on the pulse of this new social media. 

Other keen examples of Facebook’s impact on media outlets are the cases of Amanda Knox, a University of Washington student being held in a murder investigation in Italy and New York Governor Eliot Spitzer sex scandal with a New Jersey prostitute by the name of Ashley Alexandra Dupre.  Both of these women in the two stories were hounded on social media outlets like Facebook including MySpace and YouTube for information and evidence to the identities of these two mysterious women.  Anything that the public posts on these new social media outlets is fair game for media outlets and the broader viewing audience.  In conclusion and in connection to the reading this week, “The Web created a new ecosystem.”

- Are new social media mediums providing a positive or negative outlet for media outlets and audiences?

- Is there a line to be drawn in terms of access and privacy on these new social media forms?

I would like to address Professor Kathy Gill’s question: “Why are politicians and governments on the Web?” A response may be found in the second chapter of O’Reilly’s book when he writes: “At their heart, the technologies of tomorrow’s news are fueling something emergent—a conversation in which the grassroots are absolutely essential”. 

Politicians are on the Web because it provides for a conversation to emerge, which is essential to their success!  Politicians want voters to think that they are listening to their concerns and not bulldozing over them. 

A solid example of politicians’ grassroots efforts online comes from my participation in Obama’s campaign through his website and constant email updates.  I proudly donated $25 to Obama’s campaign when I caucused for him during our Washington State primaries.  And ever since I made my donation, I have been flanked with email updates from his campaign center which have prompted me to links routed to his website, positive press YouTube videos, etc.  His emails’ contain very personal and grassroots tones which appeal to me as a young voter who has in the past been neglected by contenders in presidential elections.  And I absolutely love it when Michelle Obama writes me an email.  I feel connected, attached, and involved in his campaign just by being passive and reading the cheesy, gushy emails sent out to the masses!          

To address Professor Kathy Gill’s other question, “Why are newspapers and broadcast outlets on the Web?” I would like to use Fox News cable channel as a reference. 

Even though Fox promises “fair and balanced” reporting in their news broadcast, I have studied many times in various other Communication courses that the Fox channel is stoutly conservative, ferociously patriotic, and can attribute their rapid growth in the past couple years to viewership supporting the current Bush administration. 

To seem more edgy, rebellious, or hip, Fox has established blogs for viewers to respond back.  Yes, we all know that blogs are sometimes considered a venue to “rant”, are for the “citizen journalist”, provide an opportunity to disassociate from the influence of their big brother owners or flagship media outlets… but how can we expect these media outlets’ blogs, like FOXs’, to be any different from the false promises their television broadcasts present?

If Obama wins the 2008 election, will we in hindsight credit his advisors ability to mobilize donors and supporter from his online/web-based campaign efforts?  

Can you trust a blog under the umbrella of a biased major media outlet to be unbiased?

Since blogs are seen as such an independent form of news reporting, I wonder what the traditional media outlet’s success is with blogging?  And how would we measure this? 

Do Hillary supporters feel as connected through online avenues to her campaign as I feel to Obamas’ campaign?  Is she utilizing the Web as well as he is?     

When I read the From Tom Paine to Blogs and Beyond chapter, certain terms popped off the page for me. On page one I read about how “personal journalism is not a new invention”… that people have been “stirring the pot”… and that personal journalism is “civic-minded and occasionally controversial.”

In honor of my first blogging experience and for this response, I would like to cause some controversy and “stir this pot” a little. First I have to explain my reasoning for taking this class. It is because I’m disappointed in our departments lack of experiential learning opportunities in the classroom. I registered for this blogging class because of my frustration with the many “theory based” classes offered here in the Department of Communication. I’ve taken classes with titles like interpersonal communication, small group communication and nonverbal communication. All ridiculous, all far too elementary, all wasteful.

So many of our 900+ students graduate from our department confused about which career path to take because they never had classes focused on specific Communication careers. These “theory-based” classes do not help students narrow down their career paths.

To take this one step further, what about internships required by the department? This experiential learning is vital in developing students’ skills sets in a major like Communication that is so dependent on workplace experience.

Of course we do offer some classes that provide experiential learning opportunities. Kathleen Fearn-Banks’ PR course, Karen Rathes’ Feature Writing course, and Lisa Cohen’s News in the 21^st Century course are all great examples of the types of courses that will provide us with marketable skill sets to compete in the job search after graduation.

I feel justified in this criticism because I feel that I have a strong hand on the pulse of the department and am a strong representation of our diverse student body. I am a department scholarship recipient, held a two year internship with Victoria Sprang the department’s Alumni Manager, was featured in this year’s Graduation Celebration video, am the president of the campus chapter of the Association of Women in Communication, have personal connections to faculty like nannying for Professor David Domke’s children, etc.

On page five in Dispatches from blogistan, Stefanac speaks of “an urge to communicate with peers and to help shape our own communities.” I am thrilled to exercise my voice on this blog and attempt to raise awareness of this issue and enact some change in the department. I am standing on my blog soap box pleading that our department provide more practical, hands-on, applicable learning for its students.

Do you agree with my criticism of the Department of Communication?

How does the use of a blog as a soap box improve and hurt our society’s various conversations through new media?

Has blogging gained enough power and momentum in our current society to “help shape our communities” or is it still a developing form of communication? How would we measure this?

Can a blog truly be used for objective reporting? Will there always be underling personal opinions since it is such a free form of writing?