One week down, many to go

I feel a sense of relief that my story partner, Lindsey, and I were able to complete our first team story. I know it is only one week in, but I have already learned a lot about everything ranging from making phone calls to what to look for when taking photos to using new audio editing software.

I learned to be patient when waiting for people to call back, but to also be proactive while waiting--send e-mails, thinking of every person imaginable that could be contacted. Once I figured this out, I was able to obtain a lot more information much more quickly. Also, I learned that it is necessary to STAY in one place while taking pictures, so that you are able to get a better feel for the environment and the people you are trying to capture. Angles, many shots, and patience are the key to successful photos. I also had the opportunity to use the long lens, where I learned that distance and focus are important. We had some struggles with saving correctly in Adobe Audition and ended up voicing over at KBIA, which proved to be beneficial because we were able to familiarize ourselves the super nice staff and how things work at KBIA.

Overall, week one of stories was both a challenge and exciting. I am anxious to learn more about the intricacies of Adobe Audition, the long camera lens, and how to work those new video cameras, as well as continue to improve my interviewing skills.

Writing for video

It's actually really difficult to switch from writing for print and writing for a visual medium. You have to understand that people will get bored if a script has too much information that isn't interesting to the viewer. I think that many people have a much smaller attention span when they are watching a video compared to reading a print article. Because of this, it is essential to make the audio for videos interesting and brief in order to capture the viewers. I've also noticed that people sometimes just repeat what the interviews already say and that to me just seems pointless. I think that if you are going to do voiceovers at all in a story then it needs to be worthwhile and actually add something to the story! 

-Lauren Stine

Quealy's article

When reading Quealy's article I found myself completely agreeing with many of his opinions. Sometimes when you are constructing a website your brain runs faster and thinks of more graphics than you should really be putting on one page. You can clutter a page with too many graphics or too many interactive objects. In class when Lynda showed us the various newspaper websites the one with the waving american flag sticks out in my mind as a good example of this point. Quealy explains how to cover a topic and compile all of the information onto a webpage without over doing it. This will be useful information for all future convergence projects and really make me think before I create a new graphic or bury something 5 clicks deep into the page.

interactive-ness?

I believe that interactive graphics can add a ton of information to a story, allowing people to understand it that much better. However, more and more people are using interactive graphics for stories that don't necessarily need them, making the stories over-flooded with information that doesn't add anything to the story.

"...data alone does not make a graphic useful." That is something that most people forget when it comes to implementing an interactive graphic to run along with another story. Giving the audience too much information can confuse them when your main goal was to make it easy for them to understand everything.

Almost there

This work was a little confusing in terms of the focus of our story. We had to shift it midway because of some things we discovered when we were reporting. Lyndey and I were also trying to get a more personal aspect, but the interview we had fell through on Tuesday night. It still turned out alright and the two of us spent a lot of time at CMCA this week and really learned a lot.

I had a Missourian shift this week. Tonight I am going to the wine festival to do a video, so I hope that turns out alright. Other than that, Courtney and I will be doing a midwifery current tv story. It's the last week so I hope everything goes smoothly!

Don't be lazy!

In my opinion, interactive graphics are one of the best perks to come out of the new direction of news and the Internet. They are one of the few ways that news organizations have actually been able to make the news more, well, interactive. News has traditionally been a story told in a linear fashion; however, information graphics allow the reader to use the information that a journalist has gathered in order to tell a story that interests them.

The fact that readers now have more of a choice to decide what they get out of the news brings up an interesting question though; just how interactive should news be? The job of a journalist is to gather information relevant to a subject or event, and use it to tell a story. If journalists gather tons of raw information, but do not put it in perspective, then I do not believe they are doing their job. People read the news in order to find out why the things that are happening are important to them. I think that it is great to offer people the ability to discover things for themselves, but do not let this new ability take the place of good journalism. Interactive graphics are a great addition to any story, but it is not a substitute, and it is not an excuse for lazy journalism.

Infographics

From: MinLo
Just like the article mentioned, info graphics can be very helpful or extremely distracting. Prior to the article I hadn't really thought of info graphics as a deep database full of information. I want to be able to make them because I think it would be nice to have the ability to compliment a story with a graphic (and not have to ask someone to do it).
I think even a simple graphic could add something to an internet text story... I go back and forth though... I think sometimes we (as journalists) dumb everything down, and I guess that is our job, to make the information easy to digest. As a part-time pessimist, I can see the the quality (of information, not necessarily the look) of info graphics declining like television and everything else. Sorry, Debbie Downer moment.

infographics

Effective infographics are simple yet contrast heavily from the background of the website. Infographics should not be complex because they are not the focal point of the webpage. They are simply ment to add a little extra information or add a visual component. We are using an infographic to display what parts of Columbia are heavily tagged by graffiti.

J Stockdale

Interactive Infographics

A lot of times, infographics on the internet can take advantage of how much more data they can convey than traditional print ones. There is certainly such a thing as too much information, and a terribly detailed interactive graphic can certainly be overwhelming to a reader. I can think of several times when I started clicking on things in an interactive graphic, only to give up after realizing just how much time and effort it wanted from me.
Infographics in print are so useful because they convey only the most important and relative information. The option of interactivity that the web medium offers allows you to add more information than print would have space for, but that doesn't mean that you have to use every piece of data you collect. There is still a necessity to analyze and summarize the data down to the most relevant and interesting.

Infographics

By Scott Krones

A well-made and relevant information graphic can really add another dimension to your story and make your piece a complete package. However, there's a tricky line where one could easily overdo it, overriding the importance of the journalism with an overdone infographic that draws people away from the actual relevance of the story. A simple and effective graphic is a very good idea for journalists who want that visual connection with readers who may not want to read the entire story, but can connect better with other mediums. As long as the graphic supports the story and fits everything well, an information graphic can really spice up your story and make you look very professional.

Infographics

Hope nobody got blown away in the storm(s) last night! Maybe the Missourian should do an infographic on that...maybe not.

I really agree with Quealy when he says that infographics are meant to add understanding and a little something extra to the page. Sometimes it is helpful, or at least interpreting to know the data behind a story you just read, or even know the data just for the sake of having it. And yeah, it may be able to draw a reader into your webpage for just that little bit longer. The graphic the Missourian did on the Primary election I remember fiddling with for quite a while. I told my parents, they didn't think it could be done. I sent it with them, and after a little technical trouble, they were messing around with it too. 

I also think that there is such a thing as too much data. And that you have to be sensible in what you put in that graphic. It's got to be user friendly, and it can't overwhelm otherwise you lose the entire point of making that graphic, to supplement and inform the reader. And while journalists tend to be a little over the top, that's one area where we have to use common sense.

Interactive graphics

Interactive graphics, like most things in life, have their pros and cons. They can delivery necessary information, but they can also overwhelm the reader/viewer.

Graphics are like cliffnote version of the article and I suppose that's ok. Not too many people have time to read the entire people. Many just have time to look at an interactive graphic. Writers should not be offended.

The graphics do need to be kept simple. No point in trying to make the readers head spin.

Overall, interactive graphics add a lot to stories.

Infographics-Lauren Stine

I faced the problem of having an infographic with so much information that I felt like I was flooding the viewer in J2100 when I made an interactive map. It can be really difficult to decide what information is necessary and what isn't because as a journalist you still want to give the viewer/reader the whole truth without leaving anything important out. This is why I agree with Quealy that not all stories warrant an infographic. It is our job as journalists to take information and data and make it meaningful. By throwing a bunch of data at the reader they are most likely going to walk away with little knowledge of what they just saw. Because of this it is beneficial to create graphics that have less data and more explanation so that the viewer can really understand what it is they are looking at. 

interactive graphics

I really think that interactive graphics have the ability to really change the look and add to the story. For example, an interactive map of the areas effected by the floods can really help out viewers more than listing the areas that are impacted. I like the to be able to give the viewer the ability to choose what they would like to see and when they would like to see that. 

I do also think that these graphics can not help every story. You should not just add graphics for the sake of adding them, but only if  you feel the story needs that element to help the viewer better understand. I like that the internet and online applications are growing to allow viewers to explore journalism for themselves, but I really do not think these help if they take away from the story overall. 

Interactive Graphics

I thought that Quealy made some good points when he said that some graphics could contain too much information. But, at the same times, that's one of the benefits with online interactive graphics, the very fact that you can do that. You're no longer limited by space or colors or even 2 dimensions. Sure, sometimes it can get overwhelming. But, with information and statistics becoming more and more easily available for journalists, I really think there's no reason why we shouldn't utilize all of that information to give our readers the most information possible.

This, of course, has limitations, and the journalist needs to be aware of what information is just plain useless. For instance, if you're making an interactive map of Iraq, marking points where battles or bombings have occurred, relevant information might include how many people were killed, the time of day, etc. but we really don't need to know say that it was 74 degrees outside at that moment. There has to be a line drawn somewhere between information and clutter, and the interactive flash graphic creator, like any other designer needs to be aware of the attention spans of their audience.

Good Design vs. Bad Design

By Kristie Aronow

I think good design is easy on the eyes and makes sense. This does not mean that good design has to be boring. Depending on what you're trying to draw attention to good design could involve an array of colors (Not just boring neutral black, white, and gray tones). The design of a page ultimately depends on what you're trying to sell a viewer. I think a good front page is simple and allows for easy access with no easter eggs. Inner pages (depending on subject) should all have a similar layout. Bad design basically draws your attention away from what you want the viewer to concentrate on, and may ultimately make a viewer leave the site.

The Internet is Evil

So, apparently my old posts did not post as I would have liked, i.e. actually onto the page, luckily I saved my old posts to my computer. To Review:
KBIA
I like the idea of a print and audio combined. To be honest for the lazy consumer having an audio news story is ideal, because then you don't have to take the time to read. However, what kind of a person would spend time looking for a news only to not read it?

I think the audio for "Regional Airports Feel Effects of High Fuel Costs" (http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kbia/
news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1293246) was interesting, because you can almost hear the strain in the voices of her interviewees. I think audio adds personality to otherwise flat pieces. There was no natural sound, which was disappointing. Natural sound wasn't essential to the story, but would have been a nice touch.

The print story was disappointing, because it offered no new information. I would have liked more detail in the print story, but again not really necessary. I understood the point of the story. Overall, I enjoyed this type of media.

Staging Video
Instant gut reaction: ACK!! BAD!!! Don't stage your video! Every time I walk through the arch of the journalism buildings I see "Wise shall be the bearers of light" engraving. I think that phrase explains what I think journalists in this era do: Bring the truth to light. We don't make the truth happen, we simply show the truth. In my mind it's almost like shining a flashlight out on the world and saying, "Look at this it's interesting and you should know about it, because it's the truth."

Journalistic Video
The story I picked to blog about is "Playing Ball for Life" http://www.komu.com/satellite/SatelliteRender/KOMU.com/
ba8a4513-c0a8-2f11-0063-9bd94c70b769/7a854a69-80ce-0971-0140-fd25e9769356 . The story is your classic child gets cancer, community fiscal support surges to help family. I picked this story mostly for its multimedia coverage. The story was covered on the news, put to the web, and had pictures added. I thought the pictures added to the story, but the text story was basically the script of the video. Overall, I thought the story was a good video piece, but more detailed coverage would be needed for the text piece. I received no new information for the text, however, the pictures did add to the overall story.

Writing for a visual media seems difficult. You have to re-say all the questions you said, without actually saying them. You also need to have a sort of rhythm in order for it to sound right.

Web Design

Most of what I learned from the "Basic Design Principles" reading seems like common sense. However, small common sense factors can really impact the professional appearance of a website. The most important thing I learned from the reading was good websites need to be repetitious. Professional looking websites are repetitious in their overall design as well as their alignment. I also learned that keeping a website simple can be more effective and soothing too the eye, than cluttering a website page with a lot of information.

Jordan S

Web Design

This article was really helpful to me when thinking about the layout for our final project. I have learned a tremendous amount about repetition, alignment, and contrast. This has showed me that by using contrast I can emphasize certain words and sentences. Contrast is like using darker font on a white background or vice versa. The portion of the article that was on alignment was eye opening for me because it was something I had never really thought about when surfing the web. After reading it, I now notice exactly what they are talking about when I am looking at certain web sites. Its really bugs me when things are out of alignment now. I think that The Non-Designers Designer Book would be one I need to look into before I go much farther into my career path. It seems like a very helpful and useful piece of literature.

Good vs. Bad Design-Lauren Stine

I agree that navigation and functionality are most important when making a website (even though I'm a design nerd and I like making things look pretty). I hate when I go to a website and I have to scroll for a long time in order to find what it is I am looking for, therefore I prefer websites that have the most important information above the page break to avoid scrolling. I also feel that repetition is very important in web design because it allows the eye to easily flow from one page to the next without confusion. I feel that there are many news websites today that are too cluttered and unorganized design may need to be more of a focus in newsrooms. 

Web Design

I think my biggest thing with web design is navigation. I hate how myspace has these free html page builders that when you click on home and you're taken somewhere else. So frustrating. I also love a creative web design. Like the clever way the home builders had nails and photos in the house windows for links.
I prefer an organized website, where things are in a page is very important. I like contrasting colors on a page, not a neon green and black, no eye sores. But black and white, red and black, etc. In all, the design of the webpage is critical in catching the eye of the reader while refraining from frustrating the reader.

Good/bad design

I definitely think that design makes or breaks a website. I honestly can't take a page seriously if the design is bad. There are certain fonts (comic sans, curlz, etc.) that I can't take seriously, as well as certain color combinations. I really hate to sound like a snob, but bad web design just looks messy and unprofessional.

Good design is most certainly more than just looking good. It must help the page function well and be consistant. While the design of a page is important, the content is even more important. Therefore, the design needs to help emphasize how awesome your content is, and display said content in the most effective way possible.

While web design has made huge strides in the last few years and a majority of webpages all look quite professional, it seems that most pages look pretty similar these days. Most pages have the same basic design with variations on fonts, colors, etc. It would be really nice to see more different pages, but at the same time, viewers are used to pages working the way that they do, so a very different page would probably be hard for the consumer because they would have to take more time to explore your page.

The Good, the Bad and the Just Plain Ugly

I feel that the first aspect designers should be worried about is functionality. No matter how creative the page looks, if it's not easily navigable, then its frustrating page. I remember trying to find a certain quote by J.K. Rowling from her official page. The home page was extremely creative. It had a a big picture where you could click on different objects in the picture to bring you to different pages. The problem was that I couldn't tell how many links there were, or where they were about to lead me to. You had to magically drag you mouse over the right spots just to find where the links were.
I think another big thing in design is color, making sure you can read everything and the colors don't clash and burn your eyes out. Words can't be too small either. Other that that, I feel that having obvious links is important. You should be able to look at a page and know exactly what you need to click on to navigate. Whether the link has a button like appearance or is just a different color, it needs to be obvious.

Web Design

By Scott Krones

A good website design is very important. It shows that you have a good visual eye, and also proves that you're not just scrapping together something for the hell of it. A poorly laid out design can really be a deal-breaker for a lot of people -- everything must be very organized on the site so people can navigate easily, the colors and actual design must be pleasing to the eye, and there shouldn't be too much clutter at all. Simplicity can be better in design but you want to be sure that you get the necessary information out to the public. A good web design makes the company, person, or whatever very respectable and makes them look respectable -- they took the time to get a good site up so they obviously care about what they're doing.

Web Page Design

In all honesty, I must have missed the day the e-res passwords were given out, and whether to use Lynda or Karen's section. So I couldn't get to the articles. I do however have something to say about web design. In my opinion a good web design, regardless of that pages content could make or break a page or story. I'm a lazy consumer, I'm not going to spend forever clicking around on the page trying to find where I want to go because it's not clearly marked. And frankly, roll-over graphics that expand as I'm moving around, annoy the living daylights out of me. The weather section for a news station in my home town just did a big make-over on their weather page because they got new equipment and wanted to shamelessly promote it. During the process the web designer must have gotten a big head and went to town, because it's so gobbledy-gooped up I can't find what I'm looking for, and even if I could, I'm not so sure I could figure out how to use it.

It's the same way for my parents who are still attempting to discover the on/off switch on the computer. As long as we keep it turned on, they're ok about getting on to the internet (they have my Convergence page bookmarked...scary, I know) but when a site they need to get to is too complicated, they refuse to go to it. 

Webpage design must be kept simple otherwise it gets in the way of the content of the page. I don't go to a webpage to see if it was well built, I go there to learn how to do something, to read a story, or to decide if I need to wear real shoes or if I can get away with flip flops because I have to cross Lowery Mall during the day, if if its raining, you don't do that in flip flops unless you're partial to skating. 

Design is key!

When it comes to web pages, good design is just as, if not more important, than the actual content of the web page. When a web page does not have a good design, it makes the website look less professional, thus undermining its credibility. This is an especially big problem in the journalism field, as credibility is the only thing a journalist has. Once a journalist looses credibility, there is no longer any reason for people to listen to him or her, and that means the journalist is out of a job.

According to “The Non-Designer’s Web Book” by Williams and Tollett, there are four main principles of good design. The first principle is alignment. This means that on a web page everything should have the same alignment. If the title is centered, then everything should be centered. It is not good to mix and match alignments. The second is proximity. This is the idea that if things are related to each other, then they should be physically close to one another on the web page. The third principle is repetition. Repetition serves as a unifying force for a web site. If all of the separate pages of the same site have a similar theme, than it is easy for people to tell it is part of the same web site from the same company. It also helps keep people from having to relearn how to navigate each page when they click on a new link. User-friendly web sites get a much more positive response and will keep people coming back. Finally, there is the principle of contrast. Contrast is a way of directing people how and what to read on the web site. If things are bigger and bolder, they are clearly the focus of that page and people will read them first. Contrasting colors is also very important, as if there are too many things that are very close in color, then it makes the page very hard to read, an makes nothing stand out from the rest of the items. Good contrast is easy on the eyes and is a great way of organizing information.

Good Design

Good website design is vitally important. I know this from my own personal experience, but the Eres articles simply backed my feelings up.

I would say the most obvious example of bad design is from my hometown. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch recently changed their website and I do not know of a single person who likes it.

My friend who is a reporter in the sports department hates it, as does my Dad. On Father's Day he was looking to read his favorite columnist. He is a very laid back guy, but from the other room I could hear him mutter "I can't find anything on this f------ website!"

The same friend who is a reporter says hits are down, though research has shown people prefer this type of website to others. But for whatever reason the Post could not pull it off. Hopefully they will switch it before it's too late.

Good Design and Bad Design

After reading the E-res documents, I feel web design is very important. Without good web design no one will want to to look at your work. If your work is not displayed in a way that is easy to read, then people will not be able to look at what you took the time to put together. 

I really agree with many of Williams and Tollet's tips for making your web page easy to read are helpful. 

I felt that some of the most important tips are to make sure that the background does not interfere with the text and the text is very easy to read. If you do not have these two things then if would be very hard for people to read and understand what you had to say. 

I believe that a good web page runs hand and hand with good web design. If  you have these elements your work would be better displayed.

Web design

From: MinLo
I would agree with the article about its guidelines for good design, especially simplicity. Some websites try to do too much. After reading the eRes article I had to go back to a few of my favorite websites and see how many of guidelines they followed and for the most part they did abide by those rules, but not always.
I judge a webpage the same way I judge a story (I guess in a way a webpage is a visual story)… When the page is designed well I don’t think about how the page was designed. Generally, though, simpler is better.

Writing for a visual medium

From: MinLo

I apologize, somehow I missed this blog entry. Anyways, writing for a visual medium... I think the most important thing is to write to the video you have, whether it be say dog, see dog, or something less obvious. But write to the actual video, the b-roll, graphics, whatever, not the interviews. It's not always that easy, especially if your video is about something that already happened. Otherwise, writing the story isn't too bad... Just write out/log everything you learned, decide what bites are best said by someone else and what information is best told by someone else-- and it can be good to let the subject say something if you have absolutely no video that could match it. Someone once told me that in broadcast news interviews should only pepper your stories, not overpower them, and that is something I try to keep in mind-- but I hate hearing my own voice.

Bad Design

For this post I thought I'd find a random webpage and critique the design on it. So googled myself and found the webpage of a "rock keyboardist" who shares my last name. After a few very entertaining minutes, I decided he's the winner (and also not related to me). I won't name him or link to him because I don't really want him to see this, in case he comes after me with a flaming keyboard, but if you google my last name and rock keyboardist, I am sure you can find it.

A good thing that he did was to keep the basic template consistent throughout the site. He has the same graphic as a header on each page, with links neatly laid out beneath. Same color scheme, same fonts. All good. Only thing I would say is that the pictures in the graphic are pretty flashy, so he could have chosen just one to use, and make the name more prominent.
Now. His "News" page has blocks of text all down the left half of the page and pictures on the right, which was a kind of boring layout to scroll through. Instead of breaking up the text to go with the photos, it would have been better to use the natural break between news from different days, and adding a few good pictures according to that. Maybe play with some text-wrapping.
As it is, sometimes the text runs right into the side of its accompanying picture, and sometimes there is an awkwardly large gap. It appears that he left-aligned the text in one column and centered the pictures in the other. So he could use some consistency in alignment. The pictures seem to be sized randomly, and some of the ones which clearly were not taken by Mr. Rock Keyboardist himself are not credited at all (these are usually the ones that are awkwardly small, so he probably just pulled them off the internet). The ones with captions said things like "with Jim" and nothing else. Also, most of the pictures had a red border around them which is weird and distracting.

The rest of the site is about the same, except for his "audio," "gear," and "store" pages, which are just too much of a design disaster to even touch. Clearly he has learned something since he made those, and hasn't gotten around to updating them yet. I will say one thing though: fireworks animation. *shudder*

Ps: if your eyes are hurting from that fireworks animation, here is a prettier design for you. Good color scheme throughout, including header graphic; pictures nicely integrated into the story; lovely sidebar action to the left. Not perfect, but pretty good for a blog, I thought.

Writing for a visual medium

I find it somewhat hard to write for a visual medium, and I feel like I, along with others, probably make it harder than it has to be.

It is easy to do the see-dog, say-dog style. Some people would probably call it boring, but I find it quite effective. Our job as video journalists is to tell a story that is important to people, we don't have to make it complicated.

Everyday language is also very important. I don't think words should be used that are not used in everyday life. It is very important to me that every person listens understands the story. On the flip side, you don't want to look down on people or insult their intelligence.

I like what Lynda said about not 'teeing up' an interview with "Joe Smith says... ." Surly we can find a more compelling way to introduce someone.

Overall, I think that writing for a visual medium should be as minimal as possible. I would prefer to let citizens tell their own stories.

design

The design of a website can make or break it regardless of the actual content and that is why people need to be educated on what makes a website reek of good or bad design. I think that people try to make their site appealing to the eye and in the process they overdo it and it makes it worse. Just like most of the other things people do they need to use the adage Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS). Throwing too many things onto a webpage, while they may be cool looking by themselves, can make the site look jumbled. Keep the webpage simple colors and don't cover it with huge text or too many pictures. Make sure the font stays consistent throughout the page unless you are trying to emphasize something. And one thing that really bothers me is the inconsistency of a website's resolution resulting in sometimes making the person on the website have to scroll sideways which is a huge nuisance.

Video Story: Breaking news

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25210011#%2325210011

I thought that this story was done pretty well considering that it was breaking news; however, I think there are a few things that could have been done better. The story is about a levee breaking in Gulfport Illinois and the flooding that it has caused. There is a reporter there live on the scene, standing in the middle of some of the floodwaters. I thought the beginning of the segment was good and it used effective visuals to tell the story along with what the reporter was saying, but it quickly deteriorated. When the reporter was describing the things behind and around him, he described very specific buildings and locations, using phrases such as “you’ll see”; however, the person behind the camera seemed confused as to what he was talking about, and did not get shots of any of the things the reporter was describing. This made it hard to follow this particular part of the story, and left me confused as to what I was seeing. I understand the difficulty of shooting breaking news, but the reporter was left alone on screen for a long period of time without any accompanying shots from different angles or perspectives. I think some different views of the flooding would have made for a more interesting and compelling story. If this were a text story I would want to know more specific information like how many people were injured or killed, how many thousands or millions of dollars in damage was done, and perhaps get more quotes from people affected by the flood. There was no interviews or soundbites from people the flood affected in the entire first half of the story. A print article about this story would hopefully be much more in depth.

writing for a visual medium

When writing for a visual medium it is important that the reporter keeps in mind that his or her words are not the only thing telling the story. Television news has the advantage of being able to tell the story through pictures and video, which makes it much easier. There are a few different ways to do this. The most simple and effective way is to edit a sequence of shots that that illustrates exactly what your writing is explaining. This makes the story easy to follow, but it is slightly redundant. In my opinion, a good way to write for a visual medium would be to write something that compliments the video, or use video that compliments the writing, but is not simply reiterating what is being said. Writing for a visual medium is much different than writing for print, mainly because it is assumed that the audience cannot go back and watch the story again in order to get the facts. This means that the reporter should not use a lot of numbers or long, drawn out sentences. Instead, he or she should use short and concise sentences.

Writing for a Visual Medium

It is much easier to write for a visual medium than a print story. When you are writing for a visual medium you don't have to use as many descriptive words because you can show them exactly what you are talking about. When writing for a print piece or writing for the ear, you have to use MANY descriptive words and make the reader feel that they are in the place or at the event you are covering. In class we have learned about jump cuts and leading the reader from one place to the next visually without directly saying "... an then x did this. Afterward X did this..." In print you would literally have to spell it out the exact order of the sequence of events.

Visual writing

Writing for a visual medium is much different than writing for print. With print, the reader can always go back and reread a selection if they didn't catch what it was saying the first time. In contrast, someone watching a visual story will probably only get to see it once. Therefore, you can't overload the audience with too much audio information because it would be too difficult to digest.

While you can't give too much information with audio, you can however give a lot of information visually that you wouldn't be able to give with a print story. For example, a lot more emotion can be expressed visually because it has much more impact to watch a person crying because of something that happened than to read something like "so-and-so cries because of blah blah".

Overall, I'd say that both mediums have definite strengths and weaknesses, and writing for either one is way different than writing for the other one.

We don't need a narrator!

I think that one of the really cool things about writing visually is that you don't necessarily need to have a script for the journalist. I've always been pretty impressed with journalists who could tell the story using the words of the sources, instead of having to add in their own dialogue. 

One example that I found of this was on the Missourian's website. They published a story about the piano recital that was held on campus last week. It started with some shots of the pianists, the crowd, etc. There were close up shots on the pianists' feet hitting the pedals, the crowd's feet tapping along to the music, etc. Then, the clip went to a shot of a director and various people talking about the camp and the recital. Overall, the piece was informative and visually appealing, but the journalist didn't say a word.

Visual Medium

After reading the Poytner article and watching some CNN video clips, I realized my main problem is staying focused. Before shooting, I need to outline the main points of my story and write one concise sentence that explains my story idea. Then, I need to keep in mind my main points while shooting my story. Finally, I need to stay true to my main points when writing for my visual piece. On a side note, I really like their interviewing tips.
J Stockdale

Pam Anderson, Tommy Lee reunite

I was looking for a quick example of entertainment journalism because that is the area I want to go into. However, when I came across the Pam and Tommy story I was confused, I saw a lot of zooming and panning. According to what I learned it was not supposed to be that way. Nevertheless, the Pam Anderson story and the little side bar about Michael Jackson doesn't really seem like real news. When compared to the Hogans threatened story, it was still not very good. Same zooming and panning. The anchors were cheesy in my opinion. 

I think I agree with most when I say that I am more comfortable with the video component of journalism. I like to show things. I like photography and video seems like photography's little cousin. When trying to write to the audio I had some struggle trying to figure out what to say and how to keep from saying what my audio could tell the listener. At the same time, I liked my audio piece the best because I had more time and I could work the program, although it was janky. 

Video Medium and an Example

In my personal opinion, writing for TV is easier than writing for audio. I know this may not be the case for everyone, but in the Video medium you don't have to rely completely on your words to tell the whole story. Your b-roll comes in for the assist. I also think that with the help of some good b-roll a story can be turned from cut and dry to something that's really cool. Granted, that also means that you have to have good b-roll and know the general direction you want your story to head. With audio, I found myself getting too lost in words trying to explain every little detail to my listener. I grew up with the idea of, why tell when I can show?

I found this example on CNN of Prince William being knighted. There is no audio component to the story (which I found slightly annoying) but the video does a very good job with piecing together the events of the day. Paired with the headline, you know what's going on. I think it helps to show the importance of good b-roll.

One side note, and this may be blasphemy to all that is convergence, but I am not a fan of the i-reporter series on CNN where people can send in their video. It's cool that they can send in video that a news organization might not otherwise have, but there comes a point when you have to consider the quality of that video before you piece it into a story. 

What about the rest?

I realize that broadcast news or multimedia video, in this case, has to be really focused. This is something I struggle with. I hate having to leave out various parts of a story that may not be part of my main focus, but are intersting little side facts that step a little bit out of line. I feel like I'm bringing only an entree to the dinner table.
After really watching focused stories, I've realized that that entree has your whole meal in one. We watch video to get a quick idea of what is going on. One may not care about whether or not they get the side details. That's not as relevant. If we want more information, we read the text that may accompany the video, or research it further. A strong video is focused and it delivers what people expect out of it, a rundown of the story telling all that is important. I know I'm going to struggle with this.

For Better or For Worse?

Back when the Olympic torch was going through California, I remember watching TV and comparing some of the footage I saw on CNN to what I saw on a more amatuer video on Current.Com. I believe it was called "Dude, Where's My Torch?", and I can easily recall its content. CNN was showing a few aerial shots, a few shots of the crowd, a few shots of the torch and some not-quite-as-harsh comments from the crowd. I felt like I got the idea of the story, but it wasn't until I watched the amatuer video that I realized CNN had not been able to capture the emotion. Whoever did this amatuer video had great shots, though some could have been steadier. They had great sound bites where people were letting out whatever was on their mind, and they really captured the tense feeling between the proud Chinese, and those who were fighting to "Free Tibet." If I do remember right, I think they also used music, an ethical no no.
Needless to say, it was an amazing video that really felt like it was at the heart. It felt raw and real, like they weren't trying to hide anything. Maybe it had something to do with the fact people could open up to someone that's not a reporter easier, or they could get better shots without the shell of a live truck riding on their back. Who knows? Either way, I was somewhat appalled in thinking about what else I could be missing from other stories. How much more was there that I missed?

video critique

The Clip I decided to critique is called Automated Restaurant ____ http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2008/06/16/pleitgen.germany.auto.restaurant.cnn

The Good

The story’s content is very interesting. Visually, the clip uses a variety of appealing B roll. However, the B roll looks redundant after a while.

The Ugly.

The intro to the story was staged! The clip’s first 9 seconds are not visually pleasing and do not properly show the significance of the story. I do not like the reporter’s decision to appear frequently throughout the piece. 

J Stockdale

Writing for Visual Medium

By Scott Krones

I agree with some of the previous posts. It is challenging to create a compelling yet relevant visual story to reflect a text piece or something of the like. Journalists must make sure to stay true to the story but they also must be able to make the story interesting, whether it be through images, video, etc. There must be a good balance in the piece - you can't just have a bunch of images because they look cool. They must contribute to the story or somehow help in the storytelling process.

I do some work for a sports site, and they are definitely transferring to a more digital world of journalism, albeit in a much slower manner. Videos and images are placed throughout the site to attract people's attention and to give them a break from simple text. It's a trend that will only continue to become more popular in news - people simply love visuals.

Video Story

By Scott Krones

Video: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/06/16/nat.sf.lesbian.couples.weds.cnn

I thought the video was very well done, especially since it's covering such a devastating but important event. The reporter did a very good job of describing the scene and the cameraman did well too to show the public what the reporter was saying -- it was clear they communicated well to make sure the video was fluid and made sense. There were just a few B-roll shots of the boats and the catch, but they were all very relevant and put to good use. The zooming shot of the flood level worked very well and was definitely an eye-opener.

If the story was in text, it would not be nearly as effective of a piece because visuals are extremely important in contributing and shaping the overall picture for the public. People need images to relate to the words to get a better idea of what's going on, which this story does very well.

Visual Medium

After reading the Poytner article, I would agree it is most important to keep your focus when you are writing a visual story. It is very easy to want to make something visually appealing and in turn loose the important aspects of the story. 

I believe that it is important to think about the way the story looks and is shot, but it is more important to have a well focused story. As a journalist it is important to tell the story first and then to think about other elements. However, as the world becomes more and more focused on getting the news now, it is these visual elements that will make a difference to people.

If you write a great story and can add equally as great visual elements to it, people will remember and trust  you for the news. 

Video Example-Lauren Stine

Here is the link to my video: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/06/16/harris.cops.costly.crude.cnn

I chose a CNN video titled, 'Gas prices soar, cops walk'. I was really surprised at how poor this video was considering it was produced by CNN. The video has way too much b-roll, very little interviewing/ the interviews they have are poor, and they used weird effects in between clips that were very distracting. I found it really difficult to pay attention to the the story itself because every 2 seconds the video switches to a new image. I'm not sure if  it would be better as a text story because the interviews they had were poor. Frankly, it probably wasn't even important enough of a story to warrant a whole video on it. But, I guess it was mildly interesting at best.

writing for visual medium

I think writing for any medium is the most difficult part of journalism and yet it is the oldest practiced. Now people just don't have the time to sit down and read an article about something they can easily get in a short blurb version or watch a short video on. We are increasingly becoming a very visual culture and more and more people are either wanting pictures to go with a story or to just have a story be done in TV form.

The problem is trying to find a story that would be better suited written in print rather than done for TV or the web. And those stories that are better suited for print are usually ones that are boring. It really is up to the writer and how good of a journalist/writer they are to take advantage of what they have and make something boring that some people might normally might not want to read, to make it enjoyable to read. 

If an article is something that will go along with a TV or radio story it needs to add an element that the other's don't and that is why it is so hard to be in print journalism because the article needs to bring something else to the table that the others don't.

Autism Series

I, like most people's posts that I have read so far, was unclear about if we had a specific video to watch or just to pick anything so, I chose Ashley Reynold's 14 part Autism series on KOMU.com. The series was called combating autism from within.

I really enjoyed listening to her research and hearing the families themselves speak about how Autism has affected their lives. Most families were interviewed in their homes with their autistic children. The nat sound that was taken, from some of the children playing, some singing, some in the other room playing video games, really helped keep this piece interesting and added a lot to the story as a whole.

I especially liked the sequence that showed one autistic boy getting blood drawn. He ended up screaming and having an outburst right in the doctors office and even tried to pull the needle out himself! I'm sure it was quite an ethical dilema over whether to air the clip or not. I am glad they chose to use the clip in the package though because it helps the viewer see exactly how difficult having a child with autism can be. It put the viewer right there in the hospital room with the mother and her son.

The entire series was extremely well written and I liked how Ashley explained all of the medical terminology for those of us who have no idea what some of the words meant. It was definitely writing for the ear.

Video critique

MinLo

I wasn't sure where to go so I just decided to look at something from Springfield and chose a KY3 story on two teenagers dying after a police chase (http://www.ky3.com/home/video/19616809.html). This was more of a breaking news piece and not as featury (I don't think that's a word) as something we'll do for this class... It was mostly a voice over with one soundbite at the end. I would say the reporter did a good job with what he had, but since I have to be critical:
Since he didn't have multiple bites separating his vo, I did start to feel like it was just random wide, medium, and close-up shots of the car that was wrecked, but I'm not sure that he could have done anything else in the situation. At one point he describes the route of the chase and I would have liked a map (I'm a map nerd), or maybe it could have accompanied a print story. There was a short print story under the video and it wasn't verbatim of the video story... I'm not sure how I feel about that. I think it might drive people to watch the video, but say I was at work and I couldn't play a story and I just wanted to read it, I would probably go to the newspaper for the story. Or maybe I would have done that in the first place anyways. This video story was set up chronologically, and think a print story would have been the same, and in fact I think this story would have been just fine as a print piece because the video was pretty redundant and unnecessary (well, necessary for the reporter, not for me).

Video

I watched the "Humane Society Helps Adoption" story on komu.com. I really liked how the reporter was able to write for the video they had. For example, when she talked about needing wax for the floor, she showed footage of someone waxing a floor. 

I feel that some of these references would not be necessary if the story was text only. The ideas would need to be the same, but the wording would need to be much different. 

Overall, I think the story represented a good broadcast piece, but several changes needed to be made in order for it to be as just as strong text only piece.

Bittner-Video Stories

I just watched a video on abcnews.com that showed jaw dropping footage of flood damage in Wisconsin. I am a print guy, I will always like newspapers even though there is a chance I will be 80 and the only guy on Earth still reading a paper. With that being said, stories like the one I just watched is why viewing broadcast stories online is so popular.

Reading a text story, even with a photo, does not do these floods justice. There is nothing more shocking than seeing these floods take these homes down and the look on their owners faces.

While you can learn more from a text story, sometimes pictures are worth a thousand words. While I don't aspire to ever work solely with video, their accessibility online is changing the way people get their news.

Another thought: I remember how much I loved to view movies in class when I was in grade school, so I wouldn't have to read. Is it possible some people out there are just too lazy to read a text story, so they view video instead?

Grill 39

I chose to look at the convergence coverage of the opening of Grill 39. I watched both videos and if they would have done this strictly as a print story it would have been so cut and dry that it would have been a really boring piece to read. When it comes to a story like this that involves food and people eating video shots of the food and the people eating it brings so much more to the story. Showing them eating something and their satisfaction or disgust in eating that thing is a lot more interesting than saying it.

I think they could have been a little better when it comes to their audio. Sometimes it was super loud with too much NAT sound to where it overpowered the person speaking. The audio just wasn't very consistent is all. Overall I thought they did a great job and it was an excellent piece.

What? No patience?

Let's get real here. Staging is fake filth. To me, not only is it unethical, but its just a sign of laziness and impatience. Of course we all want a great photo, and the best are moments that we may just be lucky to capture, or we may just have had the patience to wait for the money shot. Unfortunately, time is not something a journalist has much of. That fact that a photo is not staged is what makes it photojournalism instead of photography. It's reality, and I really don't want someone misleading me into thinking the moment actually took place naturally when it was staged.
On another note, a good, experienced photojournalist would be able to know more about how to create the money shot without setting it up. They would know the interesting angles, the things to look for for a creative image, etc. They may have the bravery to take a shot someone else wouldn't. That's what makes a shot incredible, not taking the easy way out.

KBIA Story: Adderall

The KBIA story about Adderall has a fantastic lead. The narrator's laundry list of work spoken at an accelerated rate of speed not only speaks to the subject of the story, but it gives listeners an idea of what the affects of the drug Adderall are. It is a very interesting piece because it talks about a subject that many people within the college culture are aware of, but does not get enough recognition from outsiders. I was surprised that Adderall users were so willing to talk about the drug and their experiences on tape, but since it is illegal, I was not at all surprised that they wanted to remain anonymous. I also liked that the journalist got an interview with a doctor because many college students think that Adderall is a miracle drug, without realizing the side effects or consequences. This story gave a balanced perspective on the subject, and was interesting all at the same time.

Staging is not news

Staging any part of news, be it video, audio, or an event should never be an option. What you're showing the viewers or listeners is not newsworthy, it's not news. It's what you've created, something false, which goes against every code of ethics known to journalism. With the new advancements in technology it can seem more convenient to edit something into a photo, or take creative liberties in editing audio or video to take something out of context, or even set a scene for video so I can understand where lines could be blurred as to what is ethical or what is not. In my opinion, if you have to do more than a basic edit to it, its staging, and entirely unethical. 

Staging Video!

Staging video is obviously very controversial subject when in convergence journalism just because we have so much technology to make it look flawless. While capturing my video, it would have been easy to fabricate natural sound while the band was setting up, there were plenty of instruments in the room,  I could have asked each person to play a little bit and that would not have been ethical. I was only an observer. Staging video by telling the band to be all at one side of the room (which would have been ideal) would have been unethical. I had to capture things where they lay. Although I am cut and dry with rules, I can understand how some people have a hard time knowing where the lines are. 

Staging Video!

Staging video is obviously very controversial subject when in convergence journalism just because we have so much technology to make it look flawless. While capturing my video, it would have been easy to fabricate natural sound while the band was setting up, there were plenty of instruments in the room,  I could have asked each person to play a little bit and that would not have been ethical. I was only an observer. Staging video by telling the band to be all at one side of the room (which would have been ideal) would have been unethical. I had to capture things where they lay. Although I am cut and dry with rules, I can understand how some people have a hard time knowing where the lines are. 

Staging BAD!

In my opinion, staging a video or photograph is completely unethical. The role of journalists is to tell a story by recording events as they naturally happen. As soon as a journalist asks his or her subject to recreate an action or event, it is no longer natural, and therefore it is a misrepresentation of the truth. If journalists ask people to change what they are doing for the camera, then those people will think that all news videos or photographs they see are staged. This will cause those people to loose faith in the news. Staging is a great way for a journalist to lose credibility, and without their credibility journalists have nothing. I believe that if you have to stage a shot in order to tell the story, then you should not do the story at all. Luckily, there is usually always another way to tell the story and have every shot be true, it just takes some creativity. Journalistic integrity is very important and is not something that should be sacrificed for any reason.

Staging-Lauren Stine

For the most part it is hard for me to imagine staging a video because well, I'm really just not that good at editing video. But, it is really difficult to know where to draw the line. Shooting my video for Tuesday's class I was really bummed that there wasn't any interesting natural sound in the room, it would have been really easy for me to create some myself, but after talking about that in class I understand that that is unethical. I definitely think that a lot of these mistakes happen because journalists don't always have an open enough discussion about ethical issues. It is important for journalists to understand that it is better to have a video/photo that might not be as good, than to edit it to make it better. It is hard in this world when everything is so competitive to settle for less when you know that you can easily just edit it and make it better- but we have to remember that when deceiving the public you will get caught, and you will get fired! Worth it? NO!

staging ethics

I think it is funny how everyone here is saying that staging anything is bad but more than likely at one point in our careers someone will do something to push the line and see what we can get away with that is still "ok". I think that this is because the rules are so hard to understand. It is confusing as to what we can do or can't do and that is why people will continue to push the limits and see what they can get away with. It isn't right and obviously people shouldn't fake anything that isn't real but there are smaller things about journalism that are questionable and we don't have a clear cut answer on. For those things that are wrong then people should feel the consequences of those if that means losing their job or whatever.

There was a case of this at KOMU last fall during Friday night football coverage when someone bought and then made signs promoting the station only to give them to fans at a game and then show them in their package on TV. People found out that it was fake and weren't too happy, but even things like that are sketchy to how far people can take and where they should draw the line.

Staging

By Jordan S

Staging anything in journalism is unethical.  I like how journalists are so serous about not fabricating or staging any kind of media. I have seen a lot of photos from photojournalists that were tampered to make the photos look more dramatic. A lot of those photographers get caught and usually fired. In order to maintain credibility with the viewer a media organizations must have very strict staging policies.

However, many news organizations regularly take quotes and video clips out of context. Take the Reverend Wright story for example.  Glenn Beck along with many other news hosts decided to portray Rev. Wright as a radical extremist. All media organizations need to follow some sort of journalistic ethical guide lines.

Staging Video

By Scott Krones

There's no justification in having staged video in a story. We as journalists are required and expected to report the whole truth without an ounce of fabrication or falseness. Once that line of truthfulness is crossed, it can no longer be considered journalism. While it is certainly easier to stage video to make your story look that much better, it is just not ethical whatsoever. People just need to learn from their mistakes in previous stories and be as patient as possible when looking for that perfect shot. It's a learning process and no one should take any unethical shortcuts along the way.

The ethical views of staging video

Staging anything, including video, photos and quotes is ethically wrong in journalism. As journalists, it is our duty to fully represent situations as truthfully and accurately as possible. Staging video is just lying visually, instead of with words. It's misrepresenting a situation and skewing the presentation so that it looks good for whatever we're trying to report on, instead of showing the situation how it is.

There's a line between journalism and art that is sometimes vague, but that the journalist needs to be aware of. It's possible to be fair and accurate and still visually appealing, even though this may be more of a challenge than staging the scene.

Staging Video

While many say it is okay to stage video, I really tend to disagree. When I set out to film or record someone for a story, I want to get the best possible representation of who they are. If something in journalism is staged, then how can you trust what the reporter has to say? 

I feel like staging something is similar to lying to your audience about what really happened and what you really saw. 

I can see where some people would choose this method out of convenience. However, I don't believe that it is the reporters job to report what people want to hear. Reporters should tell people what they need to know, even if it is not always what they want to see or hear. 

Citizens not actors

Michael Bittner

I really am not a big fan of staging during a video or photo story. It's really not a difficult concept. Journalists are here to not to speak for people but allow them to tell their own stories.

It's easy to fall into traps that could be considered staging. When conducting an interview, I will simply ask questions rather than giving people hints about what we're looking for. I feel weird whenever I interview someone and they say "sorry if I did bad." How can you do bad other than if you simply lie during your interview?

I even feel weird answering "should I look at the camera or you?" I want you to look wherever you feel comfortable!

I think it's very tempting to frame stories, to give people hints on what your looking for rather than to ask questions straight up. However, we are not playwrights. We are hear to speak from the people, and we must do that, even if it takes some extra work.

Staging video...

MinLo (I don't put my entire name for google search purposes-- I'm non-committal with my opinions, they could change tomorrow)

Staging video is tricky, I guess it depends on your definition of "staging"... I'm not sure there is a clear line as Wertheimer said. When I reported I had no clear idea of what journalism ethics were, just my own moral compass, so I have no idea if what I did was ethical or not. For example, the most I can ever imagine having "staging" something was if I interviewed someone and I wanted a wider-angle shot of them working so I could introduce them in the story if I chose to before their interview was inserted. Usually after the interview if I thought that was an option, I would just say, "Hey, I just want to get some shots of you doing whatever you'd normally be doing, just pretend like I'm not here." Of course, if the person would normally get up and go to the bathroom at this given time or something else, they weren't going to do so because they realized I meant, "Do whatever you would normally be doing in this room"... I have no idea if that was ethical or not. When I'm shooting a story, I guess my only consideration is to not do anything that I'd be embarrassed to admit... And I'd be embarrassed if something was staged-- unless what I said above was such, in which case my definition of staging is sorely skewed.

Dude, where's the natural sound?

Well to start, I really like the content of all three. They were interesting stories all in their own way. The one about the male dogs and the man that created a new type of family jewels was quite, well, odd, but the story had natural sound, which the others lacked, and it did keep me interested. 

Even though the one about college students and prescription drugs was a bit lengthy, it did cover a lot of sources that were really good at telling all the pieces to the story. It answered a lot of questions such as how many people are using it, how easy is it to get, what does it do, what are the consequences, and so forth. It had great content for someone who would be interested in knowing about it. 

The one about the man was good as well. It flowed well and it had a really good description of the man in the beginning. He was easy to picture.  I would love to meet this guy in person because he sounds like he is quite the character and his family history  and what he did to get out of the family business is amazing. 

Addy and Neuticles

I'm going to begin with this Neuticles story. Gross. I love animals, I have two dogs, the whole replacing of testes thing is creepy. I'm sure from some man's point of view, deep down its a nice thing to do in their opinions. But in my own opinion, gross. Almost as bad as beating the frog in the frog legs story we listened to in class. Great natural sound, but it just adds to the grossness. But because of that natural sound, you are taken to that place.

Okay, the adderral story was very long, but rather interesting. Everyone has already spoken of the negatives. There was no natural  sound, got a little boring from time to time, but overall it was an interesting piece. I'm not a huge fan of news radio, but in analyzing these two pieces, I really like the value it brings to journalism. 

Death Defyingly Un-natural

Don't take my title wrong, I greatly enjoyed the Mario Manzini story. That was a VERY well written piece that kept me interested the entire time. The script and pace of the story were planned very well, I do have to believe it was made a bit easier by the subject himself. However, I found myself wanting to know more about his stunts, and I think a little nat sound would have gone a long way. Go to one of his performances, or pull video of one of them. Let me hear him announcing, let me hear the crowd gasp then cheer. That would have taken the story from very well done to awesome. Also...cheesy announcer, ha. 

The adderall story. Everyone's already said it. TOO LONG!!! And there's no incentive to keep me listening. Its the same information I've hear over and over and over. There's no new information. There's nothing but voice after voice after voice to listen to. Boring. 

And the neuticles...wow. Ok, so strange story. I've met the guy who created those creepy things, he is strange. I think if they'd used more soundbytes from him, you would have started to get that feeling. I mean really, you've got to have a couple of screws loose if you decided to make a pair of artificial testes to boost your dogs confidence. Don't even get me started on the people who buy them. Back to the story. Well done. I liked the interviews, I liked the nat sound. Maybe could have been a teeny bit shorter. 

KBIA Stories

The piece on Mario Manzini was very interesting. The content was amazing. However,  I thought the anchors voice sounded too cheesy. His fabricated radio voice took me out of the story several times. I think the adderall story only gave surface deep information. I do not think i learned anything after listening to that incredibly long story. I did like that the story used a lot of different kinds of sources. The story would have been much weaker if they only used student voices. 

Jordan Stockdale

Adderall Story

By Scott Krones

I agree with other people's analysis of the piece. There was a lot of information in the story and the sources were very well spoken and were interesting to listen to because it was obvious they knew what they were talking about. But, as others have said, the focus was all over the place instead of simply concentrating on one angle in regards to adderall. Paired with the lack of natural sound or anything of the sort and it made for a pretty dry and drawn out report. Still, the information put in the report was easy to understand and as a whole the story was a good piece of news. I thought it was interesting how there were two different "users" of adderall interviewed which, I think, really helped people understand the pros of the drug, not just the cons. If they had figured out a way to spice up the report a little bit then it would have been even more enjoyable to listen to, but overall I still liked it a lot.

No NAT

I listened to the KBIA story Alison Fonte did on Aderall. At first I was interested in hearing the story because of the subject being discussed, then I found myself needing to take some Aderall to get through the whole piece. The story was very long with very little natural sound. The people that they interviewed were all great sources and stake holders but I found the piece as a whole extremely boring. I feel like after two minutes I got distracted and stopped listening for the most part. Which now makes me think maybe I should start taking Aderall (joke). The point of the piece was to inform the listener about the drug, its purposes and how it is being misused on college campuses and for that reason I feel like the story fulfilled its purpose, but completely without flair or excitement. Overall, it was informative but very dry.

Neuticles-lauren stine

I really enjoyed the KBIA story called Neuticles. Being a pet owner I am surprised I have never heard of such a thing, but I felt like the story was covered from a lot of interesting angles and answered any questions I might have. I really enjoyed the sound-bite about super pet owners opting for Neuticles because they didn't want their pet to have to feel different about themselves. I found that to be a really interesting angle and it was great dialogue! I also enjoyed the use of natural sound. If you have ever been to the vet or to a humane society you know that the sound of whimpering dogs is one of them most horrifying things to listen to. It really added to the feeling that the neuticles may be a more humane option for your pet. 

I needed adderall to listen to this story...

Surely the KBIA "Adderall" piece wasn't played all at one time... I felt that it could have been split into two sections, maybe three with a little more information. But for me (and maybe it is my attention span) I thought it was way too long and maybe lacked focus. I mean it had focus, adderall, but I think it tried to convey too much information at one time.

Of course, we've been taught "The 10 Commandments of Recording" and the piece didn't have any nat sound (I don't believe, but I hate to say for certain). I think nat sound in radio stories can be too obvious (just as I'm sure the sound will be in all my bee stories-- with real bee sounds) as someone below mentioned, but I think it has more to do with placement than the sound itself. One of the pill users might have shaken a pill out of the bottle or something and explained maybe what prompts them to take the pill, or something, I don't know... It was just non-stop talking (which if I were driving in my car I would probably listen to and learn something from it, but wouldn't think the story itself was memorable). And that's another thing, I thought the piece was informational-- it was packed with information-- but maybe lacked some emotion (note to self). I know, I know, easier said than done.

Mario Manzini

I really enjoyed listening to the story about Mario Manzini. While I do feel like it was missing natural sound, I really liked the flow of the story. I felt like the story was very easy to listen to and to follow along with. 

I also felt the sound bites went with the flow of the story. When Mario spoke, I never felt like they were out of place. 

Overall, I liked the way the story sounded and I felt like it was a pretty good example of how to write for the ear. 

Was this written for children? Or intelligent adults?

I listened to Robert Krulwich's report about how to tell how long a species will live.

At first, I thought that the "natural sound" in the report was corny. He would say the word "elephant", and then you'd hear the sound of an elephant. He was also talking very slowly, and I felt like I was listening to a children's program.

Then, when he started talking about the speeds of different animals' heartbeats, he added in clips of the sounds of the heartbeats, so that the listeners could hear the differences in speed. I really liked how he did that.

But, then he kept talking to me like I was 5 years old, and I kept wondering if I was listening to NPR or a PBS broadcast.

I thought that the report made really good use of sound clips from a professional. It was like the reporter were reporting to the audience, but then also holding an interview at the same time, and it worked.

The White Knight

Michael Bittner

I can't decide if I like the story by Robert Smith about Elliot Spitzer. I guess I learned a lot from it, but it felt like an entertainment story.

The constant references to Sptizer as a white knight dragon slayer was just funny. Bruno was a flying dragon. . . it never really ends. I really felt like I was sitting cross-legged on the floor listening to someone read this story.

I am not sure how I feel about the music, it all felt very put together. The music certainly could not be considered natural sound.

However, I had no idea Elliot Spitzer was from a very wealthy background even though he was trying to be a hero for the working class. I had never heard of this other Democrat, Bruno, and found it interesting he is from a rural area, as I assumed New York State was run by people in New York City. Anyway, I learned a lot from this story, and it held my attention.

I guess that's the point?

KBIA Noodling

I listened to the KBIA story about "noodling" and thought it was a decent radio story. There was ample opportunity for natural sound yet I only tok notice in the very beginning of the story when it was hard to tell if they were noodling or just fishing in general. They did a good job covering both sides of the story but maybe needed to think more about how much they let the Conservation side talk and where they put them in the piece compared to where she put the noodlers at; it just made it seem like she was taking the side of the noodlers is all.

Interesting story that makes you question why noodling is so bad for the catfish population when compared to other fishing. I don't think that question was fully answered in the piece either.

Catching Up

Backpack Journalism:  

  Upon hearing of MU's journalism program my senior year of high school I instantly knew I had to visit Mizzou.  After learning about the Convergence program I was sold.  My goal for the past two years has been to become the ultimate journalist or (in my mind) a Convergence Journalist.

Having the technological skills to create a web page, the writing expertise to develop and edit a story, and the artistic knowledge to take great footage make a convergence journalist extremely valuable.  In this job market having skills that advance you beyond the majority of your peers has become almost necessary for a person to get any type of decent job.  I feel that Mizzou's convergence program suits the new era of journalism that has slowly taken over most of (if not all) news stations.

In Martha Stone's article she worries that journalist won't be able to deliver the feast a great multimedia package can offer if done by several people who all specialize in their personal fields.  While this may be true, I agree with Jane Stevens who believes that convergence journalists will specialize, but the story will determine how they deliver the news not their skills set.  I think Mizzou's program, which allows a person to choose their emphasis (or specialty) is well suited for the new market of multimedia journalism.

Multimedia Award Winning Pictures:

I thought "A Third Tour of Duty" in the Best Multimedia Story or Essay was extremely well done.  The title caught my eye when I was scrolling through the winners.  My friend's brother is on his third tour in Iraq and the title hit home with me.  I can completely understand why this story won.  To begin with the story was packaged extremely well.  The opening page is actually a clip, that pauses on the stories main character.  I think that is impressive.  Their use of map graphics, tabs outlining the story, and photo gallery put this story over the top.  The story is an emotional trigger for many people experiencing similar situations.  Overall, this story was excellent and something to shoot for in my own journalism.

photos

The spot news photos caught my eye more than any of the slideshows or other photos because of their "rawness". I was wondering if and where the photos were published... If they were I am sure that there had to have been a huge backlash against the person taking the photos and the media outlet that published it.

The photo with a severed head is the most disturbing, but the one with the little girl covered in the blood of her dead parents is by far the best one. It has so many different things to it; the little girl, the bottom half of a soldier, his gun, the light on his gun, the blood on the ground as well as the little girl, and the room itself in being pitch black beside the light on the gun. I was wondering if the photographer even had his flash on when he took the photo because it doesn't look like he did which is a good idea because it would have ruined the "naturalness" of the situation in the room.

Multimedia Stories...

Multimedia storytelling is so interesting because there are so many ways to do it. Maybe there is a difference in scope, but the USATODAY.com Award of Excellence story “Johnny Holiday: Finally Acting His Age” was very simple compared to some of the other stories. And by simple I don’t mean simple to do, the photos were beautiful and it was a nice story—but there was only one option, to watch the flash video (I’m guessing flash, I have no idea). I think sometimes multimedia stories try too hard to have too many elements and it seems that you could either overwhelm someone and they won’t know where to go, and potentially you’ll lose people—or people will be so enthralled in the story they’ll stay on the site forever. I think it just depends on the story.

Hopping Forward

Looking at a picture of a young girl playing hopscotch might seem like a typical situation. Thats what I love about this picture entitled "Spirit" of Bintu Amara. Bintu, though, is anything but ordinary. Different elements in the picture seem to portray pieces of her experience.
Her crutch shows that she is still leaning on others for help. The landscape shows that she is now in a better place, safe from the harm of her past. The fact that she is playing a "mean game of hopscotch" shows that she is overcoming her injuries physically and is hopping forward to what is to come positively.
This picture really shows her whole story, inside and out. Her spirit is still in tact, though her body may not be.

Role reversal

Yannis Kontos' picture "Polaris", which one first place for a magazine feature picture, is one of the most powerful pictures I have ever seen. It is able to capture a single moment in the very large issue of Sierra Leone's civil war. This picture puts a human face on something that many people may only read about or hear briefly on the news, but do not feel like it really affects them.

I like this picture because it shows a very caring moment, but a moment created by a horrible act. A child is helping his father button his shirt, but only because the father’s hands have been cut off by soldiers of the RUF. The two switch roles in this picture. The son takes care of his father in this way, as the father is no longer able to take care of himself.

Photography... (lame i know)

I loved Alison Yin’s Down at the Barber Shop and the World Understanding multimedia picture of the year photo. The World Understanding photo is calming yet very foreign to me. The Barber Shop photos are entertaining and describe a small town lifestyle that I am unfamiliar to. Anyone who watches that slide show cannot help but smile at some point.  I do not like to heavily analyze photos, but I do believe it is important to understand the photographer’s artistic purpose.

  Part of the reason I joined convergence journalism is because I love shooting photography. My favorite type of photography to shoot is urban photography and nature. I have been compiling a portfolio and a photo book for the last 2 years. Hopefully sometime this year, I will finish and publish my book. 

Photographs of another world

I really liked looking at all the photos and wondering what they were or what story could be behind them before reading the captions. I personally love photography because its a medium which many can create news without deception, confusion, etc. When you write a story, you have to be sure it can be understood from all different points of view, groups, etc. (This is the challenge that keeps me motivated to be a writer). However, with a photo, it's right there, in your face news. You just have to write a caption to put it in a time and place. I took family photos at Sears off and on for about 3 years and there's nothing like capturing a moment. I had to make sure every family had a photo that captured something creatively, even if it took more than the 12 frames I was allowed.

My favorite photographer would have to be Tamas Dezso. He captured so many different perspectives throughout his photo album. It was absolutely astonishing. My favorite photo would have to be the one of the vandalized mannequin. I was thinking, these are journalistic photos, not art....why would they have photoshopped a picture. Then, I read the caption and thought...wow. And that's all I have to say about that.

Pictures of the Year Blog- Lauren Stine

I really love this assignment because I secretly always wanted to be a photo journalist, but was always too worried that I didn't have enough talent. I always really liked taking photos of things that were unusual, meaning that these photos were usually of objects or scenes that most other people wouldn't think to shoot. For this reason I really enjoyed the CPOY Magazine Photographer Of the Year winner. Even though these are journalistic photos, they aren't hard news; they are very imaginative and are taken from creative angles. Photography is a chance for a person to capture a scene from a perspective that a person might not normally see it from. I felt that all of his photos did exactly that- they took scenes that could have been taken in a boring fashion and made them something new and inventive to look at. I really liked the 1st photo in the "District 8" series that Tamas Dezso took because it challenges the viewers perception. I had to read the caption to understand that the man in the foreground wasn't really a man at all, and was instead a mannequin that had been vandalized. I like this photo best because it really engages the viewer and keeps them coming back for a closer look. 

Spot News...Whoa

It was difficult for me to find a photo that didn't capture and hold my attention in the POY gallery. Granted...that's why these are the pictures of the year. But one section of the gallery left me amazed simply because it showed me something most would a) deem unfit for me to see and b) left me appalled for both the subjects and the circumstances. The Spot News sections covered photos on topics only rarely touched on in the news. I was surprised to find them there in living color (or haunting black and white.)

Every single image left me asking questions. That's why I am amazed. One image in particular and the caption that went along with it. The picture was of a child screaming while up against a wall, covered in blood. The title was something like orphaned in an instant and the caption goes on to tell the child watched while her parents were killed as US soldiers fired on their car in Iraq. I want to know why? I want to know who's blood was that? The child's? Or their parents? What happened to the child? And is this really common???

As gruesome as the photo might be (and that's a while different topic of discussion) I think the best quality of any photo published should be the thoughts they provoke. That's what makes that particular group of winners horrifyingly amazing, because I can't tear my mind away from them. 

Multimedia Awards

I was very impressed by the USA Today winner in the Interactive Publication- Major Media category. They blended a photo slideshow together very effectively with sound bites. In fact, I think in that particular case, the still photos were more effective than a video clip would have been. All of their selections were very impressive though. The interactive graphics were functional and looked really nice. I really liked the interactive timeline in the "inauguration" portion of the package. Overall, I thought that the package was a very good blend of information that was functional, visually appealing, and made full use of current software technology.

In the "hurricane katrina" portion of the package, I was very impressed with their interactive map of New Orleans which showed were most of the damage was occurring. They also had a really awesome selection of quality photos, audio clips, and video clips from the event.

Picture of the Year

By Scott Krones

I chose the General Reporting category winner because it struck me as soon as it loaded on my screen. The image is so emphatic and it really drives home a strong message - you can't help but be impacted in some way by the picture. As the casket is being dragged out, you can see all of these people in the plane that are clearly affected - their faces invoke such a serious tone. But it is the caption that helps propel the image into greatness because the embedded quote is so meaningful and true. The passengers had no idea there was a body of a Marine in the cargo and now they will never forget that flight and that particular moment in their lives.

Images (along with captions) that resonate easily with their viewers are the pictures that are truly special - we can easily become emerged in the scene of the photo and we know that we would share the same tone if on board that plane. This particular image makes us realize the serious nature of the war and how brave these men and women are for sacrificing their lives to further protect the U.S. A good image is one that can transform an emotionally charged scene into a single moment of evidence without losing that emotion, which is what makes the General Reporting winner so successful.

Upstate girls

After looking through many pictures of the year winners submissions, I chose to focus on the Community Awareness Award winner Brenda Ann Kenneally's gallery entitled, "Upstate Girls." These 40 pictures were extremely moving and the captions provided insight into the lives of the women being photographed. When taking a picture, the photographer must pay special attention to composition, contrast, content and context. The way these pictures were shot in black in white with strong contrast plays up the drama and the intensity of the situation being photographed. The story of these girls lives could be broken up and presented as 40 pictures of each individual girl. The way Kenneally combined so many different girls throughout the 40-picture gallery kept the flow exciting but sometimes confusing. Jumping from subject to subject was hard to follow and trying to cram 10 different girls lives into a series of 40 pictures was often hard to see the beginning, middle and end.

Connecting with Photos

I really liked a lot of these photos because they did an exceptional job showing these people in their everyday lives. Pictures truly are worth a thousand words and people viewing these photos will remember them long after the details of the article vacates their mind.

My favorite picture was of the nuns after they found out a new pope had been chosen. Sure it made me smile, but I also, for whatever reason, felt like I was in the room with them.

I also liked the picture of the little boy at the dinner party. I think all of us can remember how he feels from perhaps a decade ago or so. I used to be that little boy, but I'm not quite ready to be one of the guests at the party either.

I was also touched by the pictures of the children in Nigeria and other countries. I try to think about pictures like those when I want to complain about the small, unimportant problems that crop up in my life every now and then. Photojournalists allow me to realize my life isn't so bad after all.

Connecting With Photos

I feel it is most important for a picture to not only capture the emotions that are felt, but to also tell a story through the image. I think Barbara Davidson's photos accomplish both of these things.

Through her Wave of Destruction series, Davidson shows the pain and suffering these people went through after their homes were destroyed. When I look at these pictures, I feel like I can connect on some level with the pain these people feel.

While I have never lost a home, I have lost other things. It is the feeling of hopelessness that Davidson brings out in these people that allows so many to connect with them.

I believe these elements help to make these photos stronger.

Eh... If it happens we will be there.

After reading both articles I am torn to between both arguments. I do not know enough about how media companies run to decide if convergence journalism is the way of the future or not. Some of the journalists I have spoken with are skeptical about the future of convergence journalism. 

Convergence journalists will have emphasis areas like all other journalists, except they will be more rounded in other fields of media. From that perspective, we can only help the state of media.

What scares me is the idea that convergence journalism will result in a quality for profit exchange. Kebbel’s fear that some companies will eliminate jobs because they expect one journalist to be capable of 3 journalists’ jobs will happen. Even in the rare instance that one journalist could be capable of doing three journalists jobs well, that person would only have the perspective of a single journalist. There forth, one journalist can never adequately replace three journalists. Different perspectives are key in producing great media in a story-by-story basis, and in the long run.

I agree with Kebbel statement, “While some multimedia journalists can handle a variety of tasks efficiently and professionally, most will only deliver mediocre journalism”.  This statement is probably true today, but maybe in 10 years every journalist will be expected to know how to use multiple medias. As Stevens argued, companies may grok at hiring a reporter who can’t slide across media in 10 years. I’m glad to know that if that day does happen, I will have the skills to pay the bills.

Overall I agree with Mendenhall statement, "I think multimedia journalists are here to stay. It has evolved to the point where one person can pretty much do it all. We're just waiting for the technology to do it better”.

 by Jordan Stockdale

 

Hey, maybe the digital age could use a few Martha Stewarts.

The main criticism against "backpack" journalism is that converged journalists spend too much time learning everything, and never learn to do anything well. Also, Martha Stone argued that backpack journalists would eliminate jobs.

While I agree with Mrs. Stone when she says that backpack journalists should be the exception, not the rule, I disagree when she says that they are a jack of all trades, master of none.

I for one, would really like to be a backpack journalist, mainly because I'm interested in many different media, and not because I'm trying to be a "Martha Stewart of the digital journalism age". I completely nerd out about web design and video editing, but that's just me. I think that it's possible to not only know how to work with multiple media, but to know how to work with them well. Although, I completely understand it when people have one particular media that they want to specialize in.

I also believe that convergence journalism will not eliminate jobs. Even though a convergence journalist can do it all--they could always use a little help. I think that there will always be a place for people who just want to write all the time, or take photos, or edit video. 

Take it, or be left behind....

In reading the two articles assigned, I have re-affirmed a few of my pre-existing conceptions and gathered a few new opinions. On a positive note, "backpack journalism" or our adored Convergence Journalism sequence here at Mizzou, is essential in the future of journalism. It's very important to know some of everything, to be able to help a colleague perfect his/her story and to be secure in knowing your job is everyones job and that very few can do what you do. There's great pride in knowing that. 

On a less positive (but still positive) note, from reading the two articles, my opinion is that our jobs as convergence journalists is not to replace people. I feel as though that is the main concern of those against us. Convergence is an area media outlets should be hiring a multitude for, and training their pre-existing staff to do. The best journalism will always come from teams of journalists. I cannot argue that a convergence journalist will do it all and media outlets need to staff five of them to replace their old staff. I will argue that a person with the knowledge, skill, and energy it takes to be a convergence journalist, will make journalism more accessible, creative, and interesting. I will argue that the capability to tell a story from multiple angles, or to know exactly which one will be at the forefront, is one of the most valuable tools of multimedia technology. 

My bottom line is that the world is changing. The world will always be changing, and we are in a field that documents that change. Fortunately, the means we go about documenting the changes will not stay the same. Media outlets need to employ a team of convergence journalists, each person on that team focused on a specific form of media, but capable to do it all. That team needs to be at the forefront of every big story, and constantly working on an in-depth piece that takes place over time. That team is the future of journalism, take it or be left behind.

Rochelle Evans