Brigid's Review of the Internet- Dun Dun Dun

     I was checking out Brigid's blog because I wanted to see what she was thinking about our class discussions. She reviewed our lecture on internet and I think she brought up some good points. The internet has taken away from the underground culture, but I also think it has created some subcultures, and added elements into older cultures. She brought up the point of anime, which in all honesty I know nothing about. Brigid is right anime is a new subculture defined by internet.
     Though the internet has stopped exclusiveness, it has also created new things. Just because people can access information doesn't mean they will. I could start reading anime, but that doesn't interest me. In some sense it is an underground culture to me.  The internet has made everything open, but you cannot know everything. There will always be cultures you don't know about, so in a sense underground will never die. Underground is liking something that seems exclusive or unknown. As soon as the rest of the internet gets a whiff of the new subculture the hipsters will move on to something new. I don't believe that underground will fade away because there will always be a new exciting thing to talk about.

To read Brigid's opinion visit this site: http://blsj1.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-internet-dun-dun-dun.html

Morgan's Movie Review

   Morgan posted about her ideas about the movie lecture from class. The post was long and detailed. She talked about what happened in the lecture. Some of the important things she brought up were the social, cultural, and immersive aspects of movies.
    Like Morgan says movies are a social event that people love to go to. They are fun thing to do with people. They are also a good way to see cultural aspects of countries. Different countries cultures are shown in the movies, they are reflected in the clothes they were, the words they use, and the behaviors they use. The movies are also immersive in the fact that they entertain all our senses. Morgan goes into much more detail in her version of the lecture.
     I only wish Morgan had talked about why the movies matter to her. Maybe added a personal touch to the lecture review. Otherwise her lecture review was great!

To read Morgan's review click here: http://morgansjohnsons.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-movie-theaters-experience-5.html

I am Not a Happy Camper

     Recently WAVE 3 posted a story about a girl who got a special surprise in her happy meals. The story which mostly consisted of a video has no point at all. Based on WAVE's previous behavior this is not surprising that they posted a bogus article. The article is completely based on a girl's reaction to getting surprise Taylor Swift tickets. The article does not at all affect our life, it only affects the girl in the video.
     The fact that they put effort into a article that isn't relative to our life or the world is ridiculous. WAVE as I said previously, has done things like this before. They are notorious for giving media coverage to attention grabbing  stories. This video is basically a YouTube hit that WAVE felt like would get them extra attention. Nobody needs to know about this girl getting tickets to a concert. The number of fluff stories is getting over the top.

Link: http://www.wave3.com/story/23592922/metropolis-girl-gets-happy-surprise-in-kids-meal?app

Mugshots of the Week

     I was looking around WAVE's website when I came across a special section called, "Mugshots of the Week". Apparently every week WAVE creates a slideshow and little info on the featured criminal. Seriously, this is the best you can do. What a waste of time!

     WAVE could be reporting on so many other worthwhile things, but instead they are making slideshows. It is not like these people are still on the loose and could endanger us. They have their mugshots and the criminals are currently being detained. 

     The fact that they do this every week is crazy. Plus acting like it is some cool, special feature is even worse. This is not special it is just stupid. Looking at this week's slideshow, we only have 9 criminals. Fingers crossed our list gets as long as last week's 32 page slideshow.

Here is a link to the slideshow: http://www.wave3.com/slideshow?widgetid=95673&clienttype=generic&mobilecgbypass

Keep Your Selfies on Instagram

     WAVE 3 published an article all about how a dad was posting selfies of his four week year old daughter, and that it went viral. The article was purely meant to gain our attention. The story is irrelevant to the news and our lives. Not only is the story frivolous, but it also takes place on the other side of the country. he family that was involved in the article don't even live in Kentucky. They are from Oregon.

     The other sad part of this article is that the picture used in the article was from CNN. That means that not only has a local source reported on it, but a national source too. This isn't a real news story, so why are news organizations reporting on it. 

     WAVE got the article idea from Buzzfeed, a website that is based on cute stories like this. Buzzfeed is meant for fun, frothy news, not actual reporting. 

     The article was originally reported on October 19th, but updated on October 29th. This means that they actually went back to improve a silly article over actually reporting on something worthwhile.

     WAVE needs to leave the cute, fun articles to Buzzfeed and start reporting on real news.

     

     Here is a link: http://www.wave3.com/story/23733763/father-daughter-selfie-photo?autostart=true&utm_content=buffere6905&utm_source=buffer&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=Buffer

Not Top of the Line Reporting

     I was browsing through WAVE 3's line up of top stories, when I came across this gem, "One Person Rushed to Hospital After Overnight Fire". This is not newsworthy, yet it was placed in top stories. This isn't a top story. Only one person was injured. They lived in a mobile home park, with only their home being burned. This did not affect anyone else in anyway. This should not be considered top news, all it is is a gimmick to get our attention. Plus they only wrote four sentences. Four. I am pretty positive top stories consist of more than four lines. All WAVE wrote was the location of the fire and how the person suffered burns. The cause of the fire is unknown, which is the only semi-interesting thing in the whole story.
     Plus the photo they included wasn't even taken at the location of the fire. It was a photo taken off of Google images. Curiously I looked up firefighter in Google images and in the third row and sixth photo to the right, there is the image WAVE used. They ripped off some cheap image from Google and stuck it in the article, hoping to add in suspense.
     This isn't real journalism and should definitely not be considered a top story.
     Here is the link to the story: http://www.wave3.com/story/23931627/one-person-rushed-to-hospital-after-overnight-fire

Media Critique: Montana Rape Case

     Three articles were written about the Montana teacher rape case by well-known news sources. Two articles provided all the information a person would need to know, one news agency, however, failed to impress. The article was written to the bare minimum, it lacked context and explanation.

     The two well written articles included quotes given by the mother of the teen girl who was raped and committed suicide, Auliea Hanlon. One article even went far enough to quote her from an interview by another news agency. They both also quoted the controversial comments made by Judge Baugh. The poorly written article had one quote given by the Montana Supreme Court. The other two had quotes from everyone directly involved in the case including: mother Auliea Hanlon, Judge Todd Baugh, and rapist Stacey Rambold. The article that had the most details was the one that cited their sources most often. The badly written article stood out a lot more due to the lack of facts. 

     The best two articles also gave lengthy explanation. They both said why this case was unjust and how it could be a pivotal case in Montana's history. They both explained that the rapist was given a 31 day prison sentence, when the minimum by Montana state law is 2 years. The bad article only focused on the 31 day sentence and failed to give attention as to what the future of this case may be. It also focused on the fact of the teen's suicide. In contrast the other two articles talked about the future of Judge Baugh's court career, Auliea Hanlon's life without her daughter, and the future of Stacey Rambold. All articles did talk about how Stacey Rambold broke his probation and Judge Baugh saying it wasn't worthy enough to go to jail. All the articles also talked about how the Supreme Court of Montana will get involved. One of the superior articles also stated that the case could take 6-18 months to get through the system. 

     The difference between all 3 articles really showed in the level of context and explanation. The two articles just couldn't be compare to the third because of the attention to detail they both possessed. They made the third article look sloppy and hastily written because they had so much context directly from those involved. They also gave explanation about why this case matters, and addressed controversial issues like women's rights. The third article was like reading a plain, dull version of the story. This goes to show that the principles of journalism should always be followed if writers want to be seen as respected journalists.