“Everything is rushed. Annita Dunn says, When journalists call you to discuss a story, it’s not because they’re interested in having a discussion. They’re interested in a response. And the need to file five times a day encourages this. Instead of seeking context or disputing a claim, reporters often simply get two opposing quotes and file a “He said story”. David Axelrod, who for years was a reporter for the Chicago tribune, says, there are some really good journalists there, really superb ones. But the volume of materiel they have to produce just doesn’t leave a whole lot of time for reflection”
“Obama’s campaign also had a superior grasp of new media. By October of 2008, its Internet arm had compiled an e-mail list of thirteen million supporters about twenty percent of the total number of votes we would need to win.”
This passage is significant because it emphasizes the professional way journalists deal with their tasks as reporters. As it says, they don’t seek context or dispute claims, they simply get two opposing quotes and file a “He said story”. I find this way of reporting to be much more subjective and honest. Also Obama’s campaign knowledge about new media definitely enhances his chances of getting more and more support
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
1. Passage: “…Phillips says. “Our policy people are going on the Web and they are asked very difficult questions by the public. It’s unclear to me whether the press is actually covering that.” What the press is paying attention to, Anita Dunn says, is cable and blog attacks on the Obama Administration…She marvels at an often overlooked impact of the internet: “The effect on people who cover the White House is extraordinary. The ability for online to drive stories into the mainstream media is significant.” Once a story gains traction, she says, the Administration must respond quickly or “rumors become facts.”
2. In this Article there is a lot of talk about the media and presidency. Both can affect one another a great deal and sometimes not in a positive way. There is always going to be Media about politics and our president, it’s something we will never escape and it’s a good thing too. We want to know about what’s going on with the leader of our country and we have that right, but like this passage says, the information can be manipulated and things that are untrue and become real. There are times when the news and media isn’t focusing on the right thing. We can get so wrapped up in little scandals that are more involved with personal life’s then with subject that are more directly affecting us.
3. And 4. In this passage alone there isn’t much direct evidence, but it’s something that most people can relate with. This isn’t something that happens in just a political view, it happens in most media. People feed off of gossip and exciting things that happen to individuals, usually the more negative the more interested people are. Coming from Anita Dunn, Obama’s chief communications officer, I believe that this is something that is very common in the White House. Someone with such a huge responsibility wouldn’t be talking about this if it wasn’t affective. Most of us now get our information and news on the internet so we know how it works, but anyone can put what is now called “news” on the internet, so it’s tricky to separate what’s false from fact.
2. In this Article there is a lot of talk about the media and presidency. Both can affect one another a great deal and sometimes not in a positive way. There is always going to be Media about politics and our president, it’s something we will never escape and it’s a good thing too. We want to know about what’s going on with the leader of our country and we have that right, but like this passage says, the information can be manipulated and things that are untrue and become real. There are times when the news and media isn’t focusing on the right thing. We can get so wrapped up in little scandals that are more involved with personal life’s then with subject that are more directly affecting us.
3. And 4. In this passage alone there isn’t much direct evidence, but it’s something that most people can relate with. This isn’t something that happens in just a political view, it happens in most media. People feed off of gossip and exciting things that happen to individuals, usually the more negative the more interested people are. Coming from Anita Dunn, Obama’s chief communications officer, I believe that this is something that is very common in the White House. Someone with such a huge responsibility wouldn’t be talking about this if it wasn’t affective. Most of us now get our information and news on the internet so we know how it works, but anyone can put what is now called “news” on the internet, so it’s tricky to separate what’s false from fact.
Mental Influence
1. “Glenn beck of Fox News, mounted an assault on Van Jones a White House Environmental advisor, who, in 2004 signed a petition saying that the Bush administration may have well been the cause for 9/11 to happen perhaps a pretext
for war.”
2. In this part of the text he refers to cable news influence on forty percent of America, and talking about the statistics of partisan bias.
3. It somehow seems that 9/11 is some democrat/republican issue that it has nothing to do with truth and nothing to do with lies, but conflict, which stirs up between the parties, as if somehow it had something to do with politics and not at all with money, drugs, and resources, overall an economic issue not even a religious one. Things that stand out are “mounting assault”, “9/11”, and “pretext for war”. On both sides there are people who believe it happened due to our government in the variety of ways this country seem to be involved, and then there are those that don’t who’s intention is either to influence other opinion for the sake of taking more power, or those who are blinded by authority and the “official” story, which is the real conspiracy theory?
4. The media on both sides seem to be funded by groups with special interests which lure the truth farther away. For this article, I don’t quite understand why it was added in the claim, it is one of those just over the surface issues that people don’t seem to like talking about, just mentioning, and have somebody else think about which no one seems to do. It frustrates me the amount of suggestive thinking, that changes perspectives there are, how the people seem to be sheep following the shepherd to the slaughter house, and blind in conformity.
Jonah Laugharn
1. “Glenn beck of Fox News, mounted an assault on Van Jones a White House Environmental advisor, who, in 2004 signed a petition saying that the Bush administration may have well been the cause for 9/11 to happen perhaps a pretext
for war.”
2. In this part of the text he refers to cable news influence on forty percent of America, and talking about the statistics of partisan bias.
3. It somehow seems that 9/11 is some democrat/republican issue that it has nothing to do with truth and nothing to do with lies, but conflict, which stirs up between the parties, as if somehow it had something to do with politics and not at all with money, drugs, and resources, overall an economic issue not even a religious one. Things that stand out are “mounting assault”, “9/11”, and “pretext for war”. On both sides there are people who believe it happened due to our government in the variety of ways this country seem to be involved, and then there are those that don’t who’s intention is either to influence other opinion for the sake of taking more power, or those who are blinded by authority and the “official” story, which is the real conspiracy theory?
4. The media on both sides seem to be funded by groups with special interests which lure the truth farther away. For this article, I don’t quite understand why it was added in the claim, it is one of those just over the surface issues that people don’t seem to like talking about, just mentioning, and have somebody else think about which no one seems to do. It frustrates me the amount of suggestive thinking, that changes perspectives there are, how the people seem to be sheep following the shepherd to the slaughter house, and blind in conformity.
Jonah Laugharn
Non-stop News
“This difference, of course, is a result of the technological transformation of the media and the way that transformation has influenced how the press goes about its work.”
2. This passage is coming after Ken Auletta describes the amount of times President Obama has been on the cover of magazines and how much coverage in the media he actually gets. He goes onto describe when George W. Bush was President there was no Facebook, no Twitter, no YouTube. Auletta states, from between 2006 and 2008, daily online use jumped by a third. Which meant that one-quarter of Americans were getting the news online. So, while the news cycle gets shorter this gives reporters the urge to write an article then move onto the next, without looking into the issues at hand. Leaving the issue an issue and not trying to find ways to solve any of them.
3. This is interesting to me because we are so wrapped up in finding out new things, we aren’t looking at what is really important. In the article Auletta talks about how interested we are with the First Family, we care about what their kids are up to and things like that and we shouldn’t. The littlest new things are exciting to us and it’s kind of ridiculous.
4. The media is controlling the information we see and having a huge impact on us. It is causing us to let any sort of information go in one ear and out the other due to the constant updates on news articles and the internet. Not giving us time to process things like we need too.
2. This passage is coming after Ken Auletta describes the amount of times President Obama has been on the cover of magazines and how much coverage in the media he actually gets. He goes onto describe when George W. Bush was President there was no Facebook, no Twitter, no YouTube. Auletta states, from between 2006 and 2008, daily online use jumped by a third. Which meant that one-quarter of Americans were getting the news online. So, while the news cycle gets shorter this gives reporters the urge to write an article then move onto the next, without looking into the issues at hand. Leaving the issue an issue and not trying to find ways to solve any of them.
3. This is interesting to me because we are so wrapped up in finding out new things, we aren’t looking at what is really important. In the article Auletta talks about how interested we are with the First Family, we care about what their kids are up to and things like that and we shouldn’t. The littlest new things are exciting to us and it’s kind of ridiculous.
4. The media is controlling the information we see and having a huge impact on us. It is causing us to let any sort of information go in one ear and out the other due to the constant updates on news articles and the internet. Not giving us time to process things like we need too.
News Post
The transformation in media technology has also altered government communications strategy. “The biggest White House press frustration is that nothing can drive a news cycle anymore,” Mark McKinnon, the media adviser, said. “In the old days, you could say, ‘We’d like October to be about the environment.’” Today, a vicious news cycle swallows most white house strategies. When the Berlin Wall went up, in 1961, President Kennedy was on vacation. “For six days, no one pressed him hard for a reaction,” Beschloss said. “If that happened now, President Obama would have three seconds.” While Obama was on vacation over Christmas in Hawaii, for three days he failed to respond to the foiled terrorist plot to blow up an American airliner. In his absence, Janet Napolitano, the Secretary of Homeland Security, made a disastrous appearance in which she claimed that “the system worked.” Both she and Obama were savagely criticized.
Overall this passage is basically saying that with the new technological advancements in media we, United States citizens, demand immediate response and new. After Pres Obama had someone fill in for his place for a speech, during a very serious and largely televised event, and was criticized for the fact it wasn’t him responding. Auletta shows how this new attitude has changed, from previous attitudes, by using a similar situation with a different outcome as an example. In 1961 Pres Kennedy failed to make appearance about the Berlin Wall and no crap was thrown his way. She tries to show that because of the way media is beginning to set up it has changed our attitude about immediate news.
The two biggest words that stuck out to me were “savagely criticized” because savage is a pretty strong word. Some other words are “vicious” and “swallows” when she talks about this new news cycle. The use of these words shows the severity of how we need instant news.
Basically this passage discusses how the new media has affected to the way the government has to deal with media. To the overall article it shows how we have had an attitude shift due to this new media (due to technology.)
Overall this passage is basically saying that with the new technological advancements in media we, United States citizens, demand immediate response and new. After Pres Obama had someone fill in for his place for a speech, during a very serious and largely televised event, and was criticized for the fact it wasn’t him responding. Auletta shows how this new attitude has changed, from previous attitudes, by using a similar situation with a different outcome as an example. In 1961 Pres Kennedy failed to make appearance about the Berlin Wall and no crap was thrown his way. She tries to show that because of the way media is beginning to set up it has changed our attitude about immediate news.
The two biggest words that stuck out to me were “savagely criticized” because savage is a pretty strong word. Some other words are “vicious” and “swallows” when she talks about this new news cycle. The use of these words shows the severity of how we need instant news.
Basically this passage discusses how the new media has affected to the way the government has to deal with media. To the overall article it shows how we have had an attitude shift due to this new media (due to technology.)
nonstop news
“When Obama was running for the Senate in Illinois in 2004, his two main opponents in both parties were destroyed by the release of their respective divorce records; Obama won the primary easily and ended up running in the general election against Alan Keyes, a Republican carpetbagger who came to Illinois to talk about abortion and not much more.”
This passage isn’t particularly important in the scheme of the article. It was intended to explain the history of Obama’s political career in his run-up to his presidency, and how he was very adverse to criticism from the media in the beginning. The reason why it interested me was because of the conclusions we might draw about a democratic process that allowed those events to potentially determine a President from a non-President. If those other candidates had not been ruined by their divorce records, Obama might still be a member of Congress. I’m sure that this sort of ruining your opponents career over the skeletons in his closet mindset has been going on since the beginning of the country, but I think that the nature of this process that weeds out candidates in such a manner is possibly being affected by the same changes ongoing in the media that Auletta was talking about. The proliferation of this un-researched quick-story journalism that is more pro-conflict biased, is probably making our democratic process also even more susceptible to this demagogic sort of mentality.
This passage isn’t particularly important in the scheme of the article. It was intended to explain the history of Obama’s political career in his run-up to his presidency, and how he was very adverse to criticism from the media in the beginning. The reason why it interested me was because of the conclusions we might draw about a democratic process that allowed those events to potentially determine a President from a non-President. If those other candidates had not been ruined by their divorce records, Obama might still be a member of Congress. I’m sure that this sort of ruining your opponents career over the skeletons in his closet mindset has been going on since the beginning of the country, but I think that the nature of this process that weeds out candidates in such a manner is possibly being affected by the same changes ongoing in the media that Auletta was talking about. The proliferation of this un-researched quick-story journalism that is more pro-conflict biased, is probably making our democratic process also even more susceptible to this demagogic sort of mentality.
Response to Non-Stop News.
1.The transformation in the media technology has also altered government communications strategy. “The biggest White House press frustration is that nothing can drive a news cycle anymore,” Mark Mckinnon, The media advisor, said. “In the old days, you could say ‘we’d like October to be about the environment.’” Today, a vicious news cycle swallows more White House strategies. When the Berlin Wall went up, in 1961, President Kennedy was on vacation. “For six days, no one pressed him hard for a reaction,” Beschloss said. “If that happened now, President Obama would have three seconds.” While Obama was on vacation over Christmas in Hawaii, he failed to respond to the foiled terrorist plot to blow up an American airliner. In his absence, Janet Napoliano, the Secretary of Homeland Security, made a disastrous appearance in which she claimed that “the system worked.” Both she and Obama were savagely criticized.
2.It comes from the 5th page into the text. Multiple people are saying that the situation of being President has drastically changed compared to 50 years ago. You can’t leave, you cannot go on vacation and not answer questions. With all the technology we have, the president is required to respond to every issue right away.
3.Words that seem important- vicious news cycle, because it is true that the news is very different than it used to be. We have information instantaneously! This portrays the fact that we have information right away as a negative thing, but what about the situation that just happened in Egypt? If we weren’t able to get information right away, the leader would not have been overthrown.
4.I chose this passage because it shows how in demand Obama is, and how we demand information right away now. I think it nicely summarizes the whole idea of the article- how much pressure Obama is under and how fast paced the media has become.
2.It comes from the 5th page into the text. Multiple people are saying that the situation of being President has drastically changed compared to 50 years ago. You can’t leave, you cannot go on vacation and not answer questions. With all the technology we have, the president is required to respond to every issue right away.
3.Words that seem important- vicious news cycle, because it is true that the news is very different than it used to be. We have information instantaneously! This portrays the fact that we have information right away as a negative thing, but what about the situation that just happened in Egypt? If we weren’t able to get information right away, the leader would not have been overthrown.
4.I chose this passage because it shows how in demand Obama is, and how we demand information right away now. I think it nicely summarizes the whole idea of the article- how much pressure Obama is under and how fast paced the media has become.
Reflection on "Non-Stop News"
“When do you have time to sort through data and information and do your own research…we are hostages to the non-stop, never-ending, file it now, get it on the web, get in on the radio, get it on the TV media environment”. This passage from the article “Non-Stop News” by Ken Auletta is very interesting. It sums up a lot of what Auletta is trying to convey in his article. This particular passage Auletta is quoting a reporter, Peter Baker. In his passage Baker talks a lot about the presidents and how our views of them can change through the media. Baker’s passage in Auletta’s article is linking how the continuous feature of the news is distorting those thoughts. With articles and more desire to publish then to get straight facts this new media can be inaccurate or only revealing certain parts of the story.
In this passage, I think the mayor word is “non-stop” because with technology today that’s really how our society works. It is constant and instant, not just with news but with everything. Even looking at fast food industries they thrive because that is what is desired constant and instant. When I look at fast food I know it’s not good for me, it’s not full of nutrition and it doesn’t fill me up, I’ll be hungry again soon after I eat it. It’s quick to get so therefore that is why I will choose it over making something at home. If I look at news in the same way, it is not filling; it leaves out vital pieces of the story. In the long run if all society wants is the quick and easy story not digging deep into the whole picture we are always going to be hungry for more.
In this passage, I think the mayor word is “non-stop” because with technology today that’s really how our society works. It is constant and instant, not just with news but with everything. Even looking at fast food industries they thrive because that is what is desired constant and instant. When I look at fast food I know it’s not good for me, it’s not full of nutrition and it doesn’t fill me up, I’ll be hungry again soon after I eat it. It’s quick to get so therefore that is why I will choose it over making something at home. If I look at news in the same way, it is not filling; it leaves out vital pieces of the story. In the long run if all society wants is the quick and easy story not digging deep into the whole picture we are always going to be hungry for more.
In the article Non Stop News by Ken Auletta he quotes Peter Baker a White House correspondent for the Times saying: “When do you have time to call experts? When do you have time to sort through data and information and do your own research? Even with a well-staffed news organization, we are hostages to the non-stop, never-ending file-it-now, get-on-the Web, get-on the radio, get-on-the TV media environment.” He uses this quote after discussing the way news and the way news is covered has changed with modern technology. Everything now moves at a faster pace. There is no time to spend on any one piece of news following up on leads or even doing too much research. Let alone time for people to reflect upon the news items. No in depth thinking just a quick skim over the top. He compares reporters to hostages in this new way media news is covered. Which I find to be a fascinating way to make this claim because that’s probably how a lot of reporters are feeling now. A hostage situation would be fast paced and high intensity just like the news today seems. Hear about it and jump into the race to be the first to cover it in some media form. And now traditional news is few and far between todays more modern news where celebrities actions are right up there with important things happening in the world. So not only is the way the news is covered changing but also the kind of news that is being covered has changed.
Non-Stop News
Passage:
“Yet he knows that in some ways he and his colleagues are trapped. “We are, collectively, much like eight-year-olds chasing a soccer ball”. He says. “Instead of finding ways of creating fresh, original, high-impact journalism, we’re way too eager to chase the same story everyone else is chasing, which is too often the easy story and too often the simplistic and too often the story that misses what’s going on”. Like most journalists, he does not think much will change, no matter how many speeches Obama makes.”
This is Ken Auletta concluding paragraph to his essay .In this passage Ken Auletta is commenting on what Peter Baker has to say about Obamas criticism of the media. When Baker talks about high-impact journalism he is referring to what he thinks is good journalism, ideas that are fresh and original. Ideas that will make a real impact on the people watching the news, rather than just a bunch of gossip, and opinions.
I think this passage shows how journalism has evolved because of the internet. There is so much going on in the world today that anyone can find the most controversial articles on the web, and we can share them with everybody else that we know. Usually via Facebook, Twitter or any other social media site. Many times these controversial articles that we all love to hear about may not be the most important ones. Sometimes the most important stories on the news are the ones that don’t stand out as much until you investigate them.
“Yet he knows that in some ways he and his colleagues are trapped. “We are, collectively, much like eight-year-olds chasing a soccer ball”. He says. “Instead of finding ways of creating fresh, original, high-impact journalism, we’re way too eager to chase the same story everyone else is chasing, which is too often the easy story and too often the simplistic and too often the story that misses what’s going on”. Like most journalists, he does not think much will change, no matter how many speeches Obama makes.”
This is Ken Auletta concluding paragraph to his essay .In this passage Ken Auletta is commenting on what Peter Baker has to say about Obamas criticism of the media. When Baker talks about high-impact journalism he is referring to what he thinks is good journalism, ideas that are fresh and original. Ideas that will make a real impact on the people watching the news, rather than just a bunch of gossip, and opinions.
I think this passage shows how journalism has evolved because of the internet. There is so much going on in the world today that anyone can find the most controversial articles on the web, and we can share them with everybody else that we know. Usually via Facebook, Twitter or any other social media site. Many times these controversial articles that we all love to hear about may not be the most important ones. Sometimes the most important stories on the news are the ones that don’t stand out as much until you investigate them.
THE NEWS!
1.
“Peter Baker says that a reporter covering his beat ten years ago had ‘the luxury of writing for the next day’s newspaper. He had atleast a few hours to call people, access information, to provide context. Today, as much as you want to do that, by the time your deadline comes around you’ve already filed for the web’—often more than once. In between times, you’ve filed for radio, and appeared on TV, and maybe done a podcast or a blog. ‘When do you have time to call experts? When do you have time to sort through data and information and do your own research? Even with a well-staffed news organization, we are hostages to the non-stop, never-ending, file-it-now, get-on-the-Web, get-on-the-radio, get-on-TV media environment.’”
2. Obviously, Peter Baker is saying it, and speaking about the ongoing, fast paced web, and need to update our everyday lives and what is going on in the world.
3. My passage, seems important in the fact that it is contrasting to show how the news differs now from just a decade ago. I like the fact that he bring in that “a well-staffed news organization” because before I thought they were just talking about one person doing all that work, but then it shows that it takes many people to do those tasks.
4. I chose this passage because it seems to be really important in getting the full image of what the news room is like and how fast paced and together it really is.
“Peter Baker says that a reporter covering his beat ten years ago had ‘the luxury of writing for the next day’s newspaper. He had atleast a few hours to call people, access information, to provide context. Today, as much as you want to do that, by the time your deadline comes around you’ve already filed for the web’—often more than once. In between times, you’ve filed for radio, and appeared on TV, and maybe done a podcast or a blog. ‘When do you have time to call experts? When do you have time to sort through data and information and do your own research? Even with a well-staffed news organization, we are hostages to the non-stop, never-ending, file-it-now, get-on-the-Web, get-on-the-radio, get-on-TV media environment.’”
2. Obviously, Peter Baker is saying it, and speaking about the ongoing, fast paced web, and need to update our everyday lives and what is going on in the world.
3. My passage, seems important in the fact that it is contrasting to show how the news differs now from just a decade ago. I like the fact that he bring in that “a well-staffed news organization” because before I thought they were just talking about one person doing all that work, but then it shows that it takes many people to do those tasks.
4. I chose this passage because it seems to be really important in getting the full image of what the news room is like and how fast paced and together it really is.
non stop news
In the article “Non-Stop News” by Ken Auletta, he says, “The strategy rests on the belief that the President is an irresistible persuader. I don’t think there’s been a President since Kennedy whose ability to more issues and people through a speech had been compared.”
I think this is interesting because no one since Kennedy has had this much media attention, and was able to move people with this media. David Axclrod said this passage. Way back when Kennedy was changing the way America was going. Kennedy seemed from what my mom said, was making changes for the good, until he was assassinated. I believe Kennedy and Obama are good speakers. They both seemed to talk about various, big issues and used the media to address them.
I think this is interesting because no one since Kennedy has had this much media attention, and was able to move people with this media. David Axclrod said this passage. Way back when Kennedy was changing the way America was going. Kennedy seemed from what my mom said, was making changes for the good, until he was assassinated. I believe Kennedy and Obama are good speakers. They both seemed to talk about various, big issues and used the media to address them.
Non-stop news passage
“As media outlets multiply and it becomes easier to disseminate information on the Web and on cable, the news cycle is getting shorter- to the point that there is no pause, only the constancy of the Web and the endless argument of cable. This creates pressure to entertain or perish, which has fed the press’s dominant bias: not pro-liberal or pro-conservative but pro-conflict”
1) This passage comes when talking about the difference between when bush was exiting the white house and now. There was no facebook, twitter, youtube and information and news was sought through publications and television. It also comes during a talk about Obama the crazy amount of press he received, positive at that.
2) The first words that seemed interesting were “constancy of the Web and endless argument of cable” this is interesting because it was never present before the internet, now cable has to attempt to keep up with the internet. Another phrase which stuck out to me was “pro-conflict” which deals with how mass media presents information and attempts to entertain its viewers. Although the information might not be important to know, or even important at all, but if it deals with heads butting or some sort of conflict, people will eat it up.
3) I believe this passage is dealing with the changing face of the media and the impact that is having on presidential hopefuls during the campaign, as well as the entire White House once it’s in motion.
1) This passage comes when talking about the difference between when bush was exiting the white house and now. There was no facebook, twitter, youtube and information and news was sought through publications and television. It also comes during a talk about Obama the crazy amount of press he received, positive at that.
2) The first words that seemed interesting were “constancy of the Web and endless argument of cable” this is interesting because it was never present before the internet, now cable has to attempt to keep up with the internet. Another phrase which stuck out to me was “pro-conflict” which deals with how mass media presents information and attempts to entertain its viewers. Although the information might not be important to know, or even important at all, but if it deals with heads butting or some sort of conflict, people will eat it up.
3) I believe this passage is dealing with the changing face of the media and the impact that is having on presidential hopefuls during the campaign, as well as the entire White House once it’s in motion.
Non-stop news
“When journalists call you to discuss a story, it’s not because they’re interested in having a discussion. They’re interested in a response. And the need to file five times a day encourages this.”
This passage comes from Anita Dunn and is about how when a reporter calls the White House for a story they only want short little sound bites and not necessarily the context of the story. I think that it is interesting that some journalists are filing at least 5 times a day. With this kind of fast paced multiple filing it doesn’t leave journalist much time to do more research and find objective facts about their story. I think that this relates to the article as a whole because it is one of the repercussions of the fast paced 24 hr. news cycle.
This passage comes from Anita Dunn and is about how when a reporter calls the White House for a story they only want short little sound bites and not necessarily the context of the story. I think that it is interesting that some journalists are filing at least 5 times a day. With this kind of fast paced multiple filing it doesn’t leave journalist much time to do more research and find objective facts about their story. I think that this relates to the article as a whole because it is one of the repercussions of the fast paced 24 hr. news cycle.
Non-Stop News
In the article “Non-Stop News” by Ken Auletta, he says, “The strategy rests on the belief that the President is an irresistible persuader. I don’t think there’s been a President since Kennedy whose ability to more issues and people through a speech had been compared.”
I think this is interesting because no one since Kennedy has had this much media attention, and was able to move people with this media. David Axclrod said this passage. Way back when Kennedy was changing the way America was going. Kennedy seemed from what my mom said, was making changes for the good, until he was assassinated. I believe Kennedy and Obama are good speakers. They both seemed to talk about various big issues and used the media to address them.
I think this is interesting because no one since Kennedy has had this much media attention, and was able to move people with this media. David Axclrod said this passage. Way back when Kennedy was changing the way America was going. Kennedy seemed from what my mom said, was making changes for the good, until he was assassinated. I believe Kennedy and Obama are good speakers. They both seemed to talk about various big issues and used the media to address them.
Non Stop News Write
In the article “Non Stop News” by Ken Auletta he states that “During the campaign, Hillary Clinton and John McCain both complained that the press favored Obama; that sense of imbalance was a matter of bitter resentment. The pew research center’s project for excellence in journalism… found that McCain was the subject of negative stories twice as frequently as Obama.” I think that this passage is important and interesting to me because it shows how much power the media has, in this article it talked about how Obama used the media to get out his word to America. The part that was most interesting is how McCain had twice as many negative stories about him compared to Obama, I wonder if that is really because of how Obama used the media more than McCain, maybe Obama defended himself of the negative stories that the media put out there compared to McCain. Yet another meaning that someone could perceive from that scentence is that people just favored Obamas ideas then thinking that it was because he used the news to his advantage.
non-stop news
"Obama said that Cronkite, who was the face of CBS's primary newscast for nineteen years, had been regarded as 'the most trusted man' in Aamerica. But here is the thing, he said. That title wasnt bestowed upon him by a network."
this passage is in the second paragraph where he also proceeds to say that this spot was earned by Cronkite. "his belief that the American people were hungry for the truth" it is a little harder to find truth and honesty today from news anchors and sources. the most trusted man is interesting to me because some people may have a different view of this.
it means to me that people trusted this man because year after year he would share the news and be honest about it.
this passage is in the second paragraph where he also proceeds to say that this spot was earned by Cronkite. "his belief that the American people were hungry for the truth" it is a little harder to find truth and honesty today from news anchors and sources. the most trusted man is interesting to me because some people may have a different view of this.
it means to me that people trusted this man because year after year he would share the news and be honest about it.
“We are, collectively, much like eight year olds chasing a soccer ball… Instead of finding ways of creating fresh high-impact journalism we’re way too eager to chase the easy story and too often the simplistic story and too often the story that misses what’s going on.” – Peter Baker
Peter Baker is speaking to the readers about himself and other journalists about how they race towards the “hot” story in an effort to get their currently popular story out the fastest, and in doing this they neglect deeper more important issues.
I think the most important part of what Baker says is that they write about the story that “often misses what’s going on.” It’s interesting to think that the “News” we’re receiving isn’t necessary for our benefit, but is out there because it’s what we will read.
This passage implies that journalists are carelessly having a negative impact on the stories they’re submitting because it’s easy and it’s what works.
Peter Baker is speaking to the readers about himself and other journalists about how they race towards the “hot” story in an effort to get their currently popular story out the fastest, and in doing this they neglect deeper more important issues.
I think the most important part of what Baker says is that they write about the story that “often misses what’s going on.” It’s interesting to think that the “News” we’re receiving isn’t necessary for our benefit, but is out there because it’s what we will read.
This passage implies that journalists are carelessly having a negative impact on the stories they’re submitting because it’s easy and it’s what works.
Non- Stop News!!!
Passage:
The White House rejects the notion of overexposure. "It's an anachronistic debate, because of the fragmentation of the press," Dan Pfeiffer says. "With the Internet, with You Tube, with TiVo, with cable TV, people are selective viewers now. There may be a group of people in Washington who watch 'Nightline,' 'The daily Show,' 'Good Morning America,' and 'Meet the Press,' and they see obama five times. Most people in America see him once at most....People approach their news consumption the way they approach their iPOD: you download the songs you like and listen to them when you want to listen to them. That infects our strategy in where the president goes and where he doesn't.
This passage come from the third back page, the Second paragraph on the first line. In this passage Dan Pfeiffer is talking to everyone in general. He is saying how people now a days have access to pick and choose where and what they want to watch. SInce, there are many popular websites ou there, many of the cable shows are not been used to watch the news.
Its interesting how Dan Pfeiffer compares the way people approach the news and downloading music. Becuase he is making a literate simile between these too. As a hole, i think the passage in the story ties up together by, how the news has chnaged. How one topic of the news grabs the attention of others more than another topic. For example, how he talked about when Obama was running in the elections and how when he first came into office, how everyone was interested in what he did, what he wear, and his family.
The White House rejects the notion of overexposure. "It's an anachronistic debate, because of the fragmentation of the press," Dan Pfeiffer says. "With the Internet, with You Tube, with TiVo, with cable TV, people are selective viewers now. There may be a group of people in Washington who watch 'Nightline,' 'The daily Show,' 'Good Morning America,' and 'Meet the Press,' and they see obama five times. Most people in America see him once at most....People approach their news consumption the way they approach their iPOD: you download the songs you like and listen to them when you want to listen to them. That infects our strategy in where the president goes and where he doesn't.
This passage come from the third back page, the Second paragraph on the first line. In this passage Dan Pfeiffer is talking to everyone in general. He is saying how people now a days have access to pick and choose where and what they want to watch. SInce, there are many popular websites ou there, many of the cable shows are not been used to watch the news.
Its interesting how Dan Pfeiffer compares the way people approach the news and downloading music. Becuase he is making a literate simile between these too. As a hole, i think the passage in the story ties up together by, how the news has chnaged. How one topic of the news grabs the attention of others more than another topic. For example, how he talked about when Obama was running in the elections and how when he first came into office, how everyone was interested in what he did, what he wear, and his family.
NONSTOP NEWS RESPONSE
Quote from passage:
As media outlets multiply and it becomes easier to disseminate information on the web and on cable, the news cycle is getting shorter—to the point that there is no pause, only the constancy of the web and the endless argument of cable. This creates pressure to entertain or perish, which has fed the press’s dominant bias: not pro-liberal or pro-conservative but pro-conflict
Essentially Auletta is stating this idea with the belief that media is shifting into a new idea set as the viewers of news are changing as well. Auletta is stating that the media is now geared towards producing news tailored to the people. Tailored in the aspect of now entertainment and to the point reporting is becoming more frequent as people are now changing in that aspect as well. With people having easier acess internet and television, they can now choose what news source they choose to watch as well as choose the source they want to view that news. So the media now has to emphasise things that people find interesting which is pro-conflict issues. I can see this everyday as television is a box of negativity (as Maddi told me). All people care about is either sports, celeberties, or interesting conflicts around the world. Plus every media source has some bias because the news is tailoring themselves to the people which will cause this bias. This is a problem because people are now surrounded by a world of negativity as people are viewing media everyday. Plus if our media shows any kind of bias ideas then the people of subjected to that as well.
As media outlets multiply and it becomes easier to disseminate information on the web and on cable, the news cycle is getting shorter—to the point that there is no pause, only the constancy of the web and the endless argument of cable. This creates pressure to entertain or perish, which has fed the press’s dominant bias: not pro-liberal or pro-conservative but pro-conflict
Essentially Auletta is stating this idea with the belief that media is shifting into a new idea set as the viewers of news are changing as well. Auletta is stating that the media is now geared towards producing news tailored to the people. Tailored in the aspect of now entertainment and to the point reporting is becoming more frequent as people are now changing in that aspect as well. With people having easier acess internet and television, they can now choose what news source they choose to watch as well as choose the source they want to view that news. So the media now has to emphasise things that people find interesting which is pro-conflict issues. I can see this everyday as television is a box of negativity (as Maddi told me). All people care about is either sports, celeberties, or interesting conflicts around the world. Plus every media source has some bias because the news is tailoring themselves to the people which will cause this bias. This is a problem because people are now surrounded by a world of negativity as people are viewing media everyday. Plus if our media shows any kind of bias ideas then the people of subjected to that as well.
Analyzing "Non-Stop News"
1. “Chuck Todd knows that the White House press corps, along with the rest of the media, is more superficial than it once was. It has lost the power to arbitrate what matters, as the speed of gathering news shapes its content.”
2. Chuck Todd is acknowledging the fact of how the news has become surface level and not challenging as it used to be.
3. The word arbitrate is interesting because it adds more meaning than to just say that it is “decided.”
4. What this ultimately means is that the media will continue to not analyze and engage with the news that they are confronted with. This leads to there being less that the public knows about what is going on because while they are given the main part of the story they are not given the deeper meaning behind it leaving us with no means to reason with the news we are presented.
2. Chuck Todd is acknowledging the fact of how the news has become surface level and not challenging as it used to be.
3. The word arbitrate is interesting because it adds more meaning than to just say that it is “decided.”
4. What this ultimately means is that the media will continue to not analyze and engage with the news that they are confronted with. This leads to there being less that the public knows about what is going on because while they are given the main part of the story they are not given the deeper meaning behind it leaving us with no means to reason with the news we are presented.
Terrorizing Media
The transformation in media technology has also altered government communications strategy. “The biggest White House press frustration is that nothing can drive a news cycle anymore….In the old days, you could say, We’d like October to be about the environment…Today, a vicious news cycle swallows most White House Strategies”
This was said Mark McKinnon, the media adviser. As an example, he explained that when the Berlin Wall went up, in 1961, no one pressed hard for a reaction because President Kennedy was on vacation. Now, if Obama was to have an emergency while on vacation, he would have only 3 seconds and would be highly criticized for having someone else make a decision for him. To me this means the president would be punished for the one time he is allowed to be out with his family and take a break from all the stressful things that he has to put up with. It doesn’t seem fair. The media should back off and cut the poor guy some slack. As long as the issue has been taken care by someone, it shouldn't matter and the president should not have to be humiliated for it. The media is very well in charge of making people look bad and it is especially bad when the one person they are making look bad is the one person who is in charge of this country.
This was said Mark McKinnon, the media adviser. As an example, he explained that when the Berlin Wall went up, in 1961, no one pressed hard for a reaction because President Kennedy was on vacation. Now, if Obama was to have an emergency while on vacation, he would have only 3 seconds and would be highly criticized for having someone else make a decision for him. To me this means the president would be punished for the one time he is allowed to be out with his family and take a break from all the stressful things that he has to put up with. It doesn’t seem fair. The media should back off and cut the poor guy some slack. As long as the issue has been taken care by someone, it shouldn't matter and the president should not have to be humiliated for it. The media is very well in charge of making people look bad and it is especially bad when the one person they are making look bad is the one person who is in charge of this country.
Peter Baker says that a reporter covering his beat ten years ago hat "the luxury of writing for the next day's newspaper. he had a least a few hours to call people, to access information, to provide context. today, as much as you wnat to do that, by the time your deadlinge comes around you;ve already filed for the Web"-often more than once. in between times, your;ve filed for radio, and appeared on TB, and maybe done a podcast or a blog." when do you have to to call experts? when do you gave time to sort through data and information and do your own research? ven with a weel-staffed news organization, we are hostages to the non-stop, never-ending file -it-now, get-on-the-Web, get-on-the-radio, get-on-TV media environment"
This passage comes from the forth page underneith the poem "EarthQuake" Peter Baker is saying that because of this extremly quick twenty-four hour news cycle reporters are not doing the best of thier ability reporting the news because they simply don't have the time need to do the best job. He is elaborating that becasue of this news cycle all the information is mostly he said she said material and not so much of the reporter giving his compentary on the subject. My passage uses words such as luxury to express how the news was different ten years ago and from how it is now. He also uses words such as "file in now," "never-ending" to give you a sense of how the media is now. This passage helps explain the article as a whole and the issue at hand because this whole article is based on the media and before he gets into the article he wants the readers to understand how the media operates to further explain "the issue at hand."
This passage comes from the forth page underneith the poem "EarthQuake" Peter Baker is saying that because of this extremly quick twenty-four hour news cycle reporters are not doing the best of thier ability reporting the news because they simply don't have the time need to do the best job. He is elaborating that becasue of this news cycle all the information is mostly he said she said material and not so much of the reporter giving his compentary on the subject. My passage uses words such as luxury to express how the news was different ten years ago and from how it is now. He also uses words such as "file in now," "never-ending" to give you a sense of how the media is now. This passage helps explain the article as a whole and the issue at hand because this whole article is based on the media and before he gets into the article he wants the readers to understand how the media operates to further explain "the issue at hand."
Warping the Media
Obama's campaign also had a superior grasop of the new media. By october of 2008, its internet arm had compiled an e-mail list of thirteen million supporters- "about twenty percent of the total number of votes we would need to win," Plouffe said. Dan Pfeiffler, the White House communications director, says that Facebook, Twitter and YouTube allowed the campaign to "go around the filter" of the press- an obsession of the campaign that continues in the Obama White House. In the Clintion era, aides also talked about "going around" the White House press ; what they meant was getting an easy hour on "Larry King" or a soft interview with the local newspapers rather than submitting to a session with "60 Minutes" or the New York Times. The Obama campaign, with it's success online and with its mastery of a history-making narrative, was impatient with old media. One campaign reporter recalls a 2008 exchange in which Pfeiffler mockingly speculated that the Washington press corps might be rendered obsolete through the use of Presidential messages posted directly on Internet sites like YouTube. "It was basically taunting" the reporter says.
This passage comes from the second page of the article as the second paragraph. The quotes com from David Plouffe, Dan Pfleiffer and an undisclosed reporter.
The main thing that I take away from this section is that the Obama administration knew what it was doing and that they used that to its advantage. They knew that Social Networking was becoming popular and used that to its advantage. They knew what the media would possibly do and sought to side -step that.
The passage means that people who are most up to date are the ones that are going to be more in control what they want out and what they want secret. This could have implications and a hand in a new media revolution.
This passage comes from the second page of the article as the second paragraph. The quotes com from David Plouffe, Dan Pfleiffer and an undisclosed reporter.
The main thing that I take away from this section is that the Obama administration knew what it was doing and that they used that to its advantage. They knew that Social Networking was becoming popular and used that to its advantage. They knew what the media would possibly do and sought to side -step that.
The passage means that people who are most up to date are the ones that are going to be more in control what they want out and what they want secret. This could have implications and a hand in a new media revolution.
NON-STOP NEWS
"The President is on a mission, his cheif speechwriter, Jon Favreau, told me, "not just to change politics in Washington but to change the culture of Washington, and the media is part of it."
For me, I think that this claim is a very important one to dwell a bit of thinking and try and picture what is going on. This claim is located in the third paragraph at the end of the sentence. Ken Auletta is saying this about Obama and what he is trying to do through media. He wasn't only giving a heartfelt speech..there was a reason for it. There was something behind it, something that needed to be successful and heard.
I think that it is interesting that Auletta had mentioned this because the more i think about what he said, the more i agree with it. Obama isnt/wasnt just saying a speech but he was trying to somehow connect with his audience and make them think the way he is thinking through using the media all around us. I think that people should if they don't yet, start to realize things like this and be aware of what is going on in todays society and start thinking whether to believe these thing and apply them or to just ignore them.
For me, I think that this claim is a very important one to dwell a bit of thinking and try and picture what is going on. This claim is located in the third paragraph at the end of the sentence. Ken Auletta is saying this about Obama and what he is trying to do through media. He wasn't only giving a heartfelt speech..there was a reason for it. There was something behind it, something that needed to be successful and heard.
I think that it is interesting that Auletta had mentioned this because the more i think about what he said, the more i agree with it. Obama isnt/wasnt just saying a speech but he was trying to somehow connect with his audience and make them think the way he is thinking through using the media all around us. I think that people should if they don't yet, start to realize things like this and be aware of what is going on in todays society and start thinking whether to believe these thing and apply them or to just ignore them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)