Throughout this entire quarter, we have been discussing the immense importance and influence of blogging and how many news consumers solitarily receive their news from blogs.  If blogs are being considered a legitimate source of news and are high on the journalistic trustworthy scale since they are not bound to or independent to any of the major media outlets, then yes, bloggers should be held to a code of ethics. 

            If blogs are considered a “fifth estate” on the “fourth estate” news, then yes, bloggers should be held to a code of ethics.  If by the summer of 2004, it was clear that government officials viewed blogs as both credible and influential when political bloggers were given press credentials to attend both the Republican and Democratic political conventions, then bloggers should be held to a code of ethics. 

            If many landmark stories broken by blogs are being catapulted to fame at the major media outlets like the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky sex scandal or Dan Rather falsely reporting on George W. Bush’s military record, then bloggers should be held to a code of ethics. 

            I do not believe that a journalist needs to be a member of a professional association or society to have a code of ethics.  I believe that online journalists and bloggers should want a code of ethics to make their peers more accountable, standardized, responsible and legitimate. 

            So, it really boils down to the issue of the success of blogs in carrying out the democratic responsibilities of journalism.  This tends to the greater argument: if blogs are considered true forms of journalism.  If they are, then of course they need to have a code of ethics. 

Then came the corporate takeovers of public news stations and networks in the 80’s.  A prime example is when Larry Tisch took over CBS, cut it’s staff for profits, and the network fell to #3 in the ratings behind ABC and NBC, and they have stayed there every since. 

Ownership means major companies own many different types of companies.  Some examples include:

- Genreal Electric owns NBC and MSNBC.  They are the most profitable owner.

- TIME Warner is the largest media conglomerate in the world with CNN and HBO.

- Walt Disney owns ABC and ESPN

- News Corporation under Rupert Murdock owns FOX, Wall Street Journal, MySpace

- Viacom owns CBS television network and Comedy Central.

Ownership = profit-driven motives = ratings obsessed = diminished quality in news broadcasts.  This means more infotainment, soft news, etc.  This is not a good thing folks.  And to top this fiasco off, the Federal Communication Commission recently increased ability for media conglomeration.  This means there will be less diversity, less oversight on corporations, more over-riding of public opinion, and a less value and emphasis on the media’s role as the 4^th estate. 

Financial pressures greatly affect our news broadcasts and coverage in a negative way.  The evil forces of profit and ratings driven ownership provides more soft news, focus on less substantive stories, shift from “objective-style news” to “opinion-based” shows, etc.   

A local example follows: None of our local Seattle news stations have a bureau in the capital during the legislative session.  Price cuts are the reason for absence.  This process is illuminating and needs to be covered because the decisions made effect the everyday lives of the viewing public.  

Ted Koppel once said it right, “to give the public what they want, not what it is they should hear, is the greatest sin.”

-         How else is media consolidation a negative for our public news services?

-          Can you see a shift back to public, not private, news services in the future?

-          Why/how could media conglomeration change viewership?

Proponents of the WASL, like the Washington Roundtable the Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, argue that students will have up to five chances to take the test, so that students’ future don’t rest on a single scores.  They view the WASL as a strong test, reviewed by some of the nation’s top testing experts.  They say that abandoning the tough job of raising expectations for students will hurt them far more in the long run than the stress of a high-stakes test.   

Critics, like the 2007 best education beat reporter in the country and Seattle Times reporter Linda Shaw and the Washington Education Association, question whether high stakes such as graduation should rest on one exam, even with retakes.  They worry that too much emphasis on testing crowds out other subjects.  They charge the state raised the expectations for students and schools without providing them with enough additional resources to achieve them.  Some also say that the WASL’s standards are far from basic – and are beyond what the average student can be expected to achieve.   

On the Seattle Public Schools website, you can check out the WASL results for each individual Seattle School by browsing their Annual Report.

(Thanks Barack!)

Throughout this entire quarter, we have been discussing the immense importance and influence of blogging and how many news consumers solitarily receive their news from blogs.  If blogs are being considered a legitimate source of news and are high on the journalistic trustworthy scale since they are not bound to or independent to any of the major media outlets, then yes, bloggers should be held to a code of ethics.  If blogs are considered a “fifth estate” on the “fourth estate” news, then yes, bloggers should be held to a code of ethics.  If by the summer of 2004, it was clear that government officials viewed blogs as both credible and influential when political bloggers were given press credentials to attend both the Republican and Democratic political conventions, then bloggers should be held to a code of ethics.  If many landmark stories broken by blogs are being catapulted to fame at the major media outlets like the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky sex scandal or Dan Rather falsely reporting on George W. Bush’s military record, then bloggers should be held to a code of ethics. 

Another dead giveaway that bloggers need to have a code ethics is that O’Reilly wrote about the issues of infringement.  If we are going to have the argument about “stealing” versus “property rights” then obviously there needs to be some kind of set standards.  If there is any gray area due to the advent of blogs, then a code of ethics might prove helpful.   

So, it really boils down to the issue of the success of blogs in carrying out the democratic responsibilities of journalism.  This tends to the greater argument: if blogs are considered true forms of journalism.  If they are, then of course they need to have a code of ethics. 

How do governments, big telecommunications and entertainment companies restrict citizens to certain sites?  I don’t understand how they have the actual capacity to do this…

Why aren’t civil rights attorneys shouting about this clampdown?  Why aren’t they defending our rights concerning infringement and surveillance?

The first example comes from the artist’s Will.I.Am “Yes We Can Song” that was inspired by Senator Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and especially the speech Obama gave following the New Hampshire primary. Collaborating with a plethora of celebrities, the video overlaps the singing voices with Obama’s speech. Obama’s speech alludes to various historical figures that struggled for freedom like President Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. I believe that this video holds great power (as an avid Obama supporter, this video almost brought me to tears!), receiving over 7 million hits. As we have discussed in class, online media is always accessible, unlike the medium of television, making it more influential. Watch the video yourself. I believe that this form of campaigning would be appealing to young voters since it is emotional, highlighting Obama’s message of hope, “But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope…we are not as divided as our politics suggests; that we are one people; we are one nation; and together, we will begin the next great chapter in the American story with three words that will ring from coast to coast; from sea to shining sea — Yes. We. Can.”

My second example comes from the “I Got a Crush… On Obama” by Obama Girl YouTube video. Receiving 5 million hits on YouTube, teen Amber Lee Ettinger dances scantily clad, sings and professes her love for Obama. Sure, this seems like an innocent, low-production video, but Obama Girl has been catapulted to fame. She has recently been featured on Fox News and MSNBC. When asked if her videos helped Obama’s campaign, she replied that it “made him more out there… this video was viral… allowed people to discuss campaign”. Obama’s campaign has even contacted her producer. Also, other politicians are seeing the value of her video; Mike Gravel, former Alaska senator, supports these Obama Girl videos by dancing the “Soulja Boy Dance” in the background. Ridiculous? Yes. But powerful. And obviously effective.

How/why do you think these YouTube video producers are considered journalists?

What are other examples of YouTube’s effect on politics?

How do you think YouTube will provide a platform for journalism in the future?

What are other examples of Netvideo’s effect on politics?

            The press fulfills two key roles in American representative democracy: gatekeeper and government watchdog.  So journalists and editors and media in general must filter information for the public to avoid information overload.  And journalists must act as the fourth estate in order to keep our government in check.      

            Because the American public does not trust media and believes it is too commercial, Americans are turning to other news sources, like blogs, which the author defines as “public websites on which the author provides commentary.” 

Two distinct categories of blogs exist:

            Personal blogs – focus on internal world of blogger

            Filter blogs – concentrate on topic

            This paper focused on filter blogs since they are considered the more influential kind of blog.  And even narrower, political filter blogs whose authors are referred to as polibloggers. 

            In the summer of 2004, it became clear that government officials viewed blogs as both credible and influential when political bloggers were given press credentials to attend both the Republican and Democratic political conventions.  Landmark stories broken by blogs followed which include the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky scandal and Dan Rather falsely reporting on George W. Bush’s military record.   

            Focus turned to the three 2004 presidential debates between the two candidates, Republican incumbent George W. Bush and Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry.  The blogs provided valuable commentary like praising John Kerry for his consistency in his answers, body language, and demeanor and attacked Bush for a suspected bulging earpiece in his suit.  Also, debate fact-checking by the blogs was higher quality and more timely. 

            Blogs as the “fifth estate”: Instapundit and Eschaton analyzed the media’s bias several times during the 2004 campaign.  Examples include Fox News’s pro-Bush bias and the media’s positive spin on Kerry.     

Summary points

Both Instapundit and Eschaton posted information similar to New York Times

Both Instapundit and Eschaton analyzed the veracity of both the 2004 candidates’ statements, therefore being a government watchdog.

Both Instapundit and Eschaton assumed the role of the fifth estate, revealing media political bias. 

Both Instapundit and Eschaton should be considered forums for political journalism. 

Journalists have at times in history played the role of a mouthpiece for the US government and its politics.

            But not during the Vietnam War.  Vietnam changed everything.  I have studied the effect that the Vietnam War had on journalism in multiple Communication classes.  Journalists were exposing the atrocities of war by reporting straight from the war zone.  By reporting live off the ground, the journalists were capturing the violence against innocent Vietnamese civilians.  It was this gruesome footage that is thought to have altered the American public support of the war.  The public attitude turned against the war.  From then on, the journalists, like the American public, became suspicious of the US government and its politics.  Now journalism tried to take the stance of an advocate for its American audience.      

            But of course, journalism has had its recent mishaps.  Journalism lapsed as our heroic watchdog and reverted back to its old lazy reporting ways with the Iraq war.  In Professor Lisa Cohen’s News in the 21^st Century class, we watched a video that explained how the Iraqi celebration of the invasion of Baghdad was completely staged.  Every major news station was present to capture a few Iraqis dancing around the large Saddam Hussein statue.  After the celebration was leaked to be staged, it became obvious simply from the demographics represented.  When one looks closely, one can see that there are no women or children present in this small crowd of merrymakers.  The US government and military wanted to pretend that they had the Iraq war under control and the journalists agreed to play along with the game.  This is a grim example of the corrupt relationship between journalism and politics.

            The Baghdad Saddam Hussein statue incident is a “groupthink” situation similar to what Coolican’s article refers to.  He says, “What should we political reporters be doing with our time? When is our supposed “analysis” simply a rehashing of the machinery’s narrative?  I’m pretty sure we [are] repeating groupthink we’ve read or heard elsewhere.”

            Journalists must return to the days of Vietnam where they question US politics with a critical eye.  Journalists must remain the 4^th estate, the watchdogs.  This is an important role that cannot be swayed, jaded, or deteriorated by groupthink. 

- What are other historical incidents where groupthink ruled the media’s relationship with politics?

- Can you identify any current situations that are dangerously close to groupthink?

- How can groupthink ever be a positive thing?

“It took an extraordinary event — the state’s seizure of more than 400 children — for the polygamist Mormon sect to open its gates to outsiders after decades of seclusion.  To parents, it’s not a matter of mere custody, an expert explained. Their salvation is on the line.”