During my freshman year of high school, I was sitting in my first class of the day, General Music, when a student busted through the classroom's double doors to say a plane hit a New York monument. He left as promptly as he came, and the class literally laughed it off, assuming he was playing some type of off-color joke.
When the bell sounded and my class was dismissed, rumors ran rampant in the halls. By the time I reached my second period classroom, the teacher already had CNN on the TV. We didn't learn any new equations or go over the previous night's homework. Instead we watched footage of a suicide bomber pummelling a plane into the World Trade Center.
Panic ensued. We were in Germantown, Tenn., and many of my classmates' parents were pilots for FedEx which had an office in town. Kids were frantically trying to locate their parents, desperate to know that their moms and dads were (hopefully) flying nowhere near New York or Washington, DC. Other classmates, including myself, were attempting to locate our parents who were out of town on business trips. My dad travelled about 3 nights a week, and I didn't even know if he was planning to be gone let alone where in the country he might be. Luckily, he was on the ground and away from the disaster areas.
The events of September 11 made Americans realize that we are not infallible. Just because we aren't an impoverished, desolate country doesn't mean that we are in the clear of horrible happenings. I know I am less trusting of fellow passengers on planes or other transportation when I travel. Instead of striking up conversation with the man next to me, I'm assessing whether or not he seems "safe."
Airlines keep instating stricter and stricter guidelines for flying. Getting wanded by airport personnel after successfully walking through the metal detector is relatively common. People aren't very surprised when their carry-on bags get raided by security staff. You can expect to find a slip of paper in your checked luggage that states your bag has been searched.
Our nation is less trusting due to Sept. 11. We were blindsided, and we don't want a tragedy like it to happen again.
I also believe that the US is more dependent on its televised media post Sept. 11. For weeks after, we were glued to the TV looking for answers or new snippets of information. People we knew and didn't know went on television to tell their stories of loss. Television comics stopped their regular routines because no one wanted to hear petty jokes when our nation appeared to be under attack by terrorists. We looked to television to show us why and how; we expected the media to answer our questions. Even when it couldn't, we watched still, hopeful that they would eventually.
With monumental events like Sept. 11, people turn to the media for thorough coverage on the pertinent issues. After all, we personally cannot be at Ground Zero or the Pentagon. We are looking for advocates to do this for us, providing facts and commentary along the way. The newscasters become not puppets in suits, but our friends looking out for our interests and concerns. Trust is given to inform us accurately and as quickly as possible. Sept. 11 gave the media industry a renewed sense of purpose. Journalists cannot slack, because if they don't give us the news, who will?
Monday, September 10, 2007
Reading Response 1: My thoughts about blogging
Up until about two weeks ago, I thought blogging was a way for distraught teenagers and middle-aged couch potatoes everywhere to digitally complain about their acne, glasses and insecurities to other distraught teenagers and middle-aged couch potatoes. When I thought of a blog, the last thing I associated it with was "professional" journalism. I assumed that keeping a blog was the same thing as keeping an online diary.
Particularly after reading chapters from blog! by David Kline and Dan Burnstein for my Digital Journalism class, I now realize that blogging can be a serious, legitimate endeavor. Select professionals have quit their jobs to blog full-time. I learned from blog! that "blog" was the most looked up word in 2004, and many daily newspapers have encouraged their readers to become "citizen journalists." Even major corporations are realizing that blogs are important for their business in terms of consumer demand; if they don't accommodate, their business will tank.
Some people even say blogging is and will continue to give a voice to those who have been denied such in the past.
While this can be true, I have a difficult time believing "news" delivered by someone under a pen name like Rainbow5000 or JustinIsMyHomeboy. Call me a traditionalist, but I have trust issues with online journalism, especially when it isn't showcased on an established web site like cnn.com. I realize that even major news networks can make errors, twist a story or even result to fabrication. But I have more trust in people hired to deliver the news in the name of an established news machine than a guy hanging out in his basement ranting about what HE thinks happened and delivering his thoughts as fact.
Even so, I do believe that blogging has a purpose and satisfies a void in society. People yearn to get their opinions out in the open, and thanks to constant access to technology, they can broadcast their opinions via the web with a click of a button. They can share their personal stories and viewpoints with the world and almost instantaneously receive feedback from fellow web users. This gives one a sense of importance; as David Kline said, blogging empowers. When a total stranger is writing comments on your blog--either encouraging you or expressing extreme disdain--it is gratifying to know SOMEONE cares. When you're sick of hearing feedback, or receiving none at all, from your friends, family and significant others, it can be nice to get a random opinion from cyber space.
I view blogging primarily as an outlet for commentary, not straight news. I find it odd that some bloggers go so far as to bash traditional forms of media like magazines and newspapers when the bloggers themselves are citing these sources for their own news stories. After all, they often can't be on the scene of an event reporting and gathering quotes themselves; and when they include information from these established news sources, it's like bloggers are saying they trust them enough to get it right. So then why would they want to regurgitate old news?
As I've previously stated, blogs are excellent venues to express personal opinion, bounce ideas off other web users and even share personal accounts. But even if I couldn't get ahold of a newspaper, news magazine or CNN, I probably still wouldn't turn to a random person's blog for my news.
Particularly after reading chapters from blog! by David Kline and Dan Burnstein for my Digital Journalism class, I now realize that blogging can be a serious, legitimate endeavor. Select professionals have quit their jobs to blog full-time. I learned from blog! that "blog" was the most looked up word in 2004, and many daily newspapers have encouraged their readers to become "citizen journalists." Even major corporations are realizing that blogs are important for their business in terms of consumer demand; if they don't accommodate, their business will tank.
Some people even say blogging is and will continue to give a voice to those who have been denied such in the past.
While this can be true, I have a difficult time believing "news" delivered by someone under a pen name like Rainbow5000 or JustinIsMyHomeboy. Call me a traditionalist, but I have trust issues with online journalism, especially when it isn't showcased on an established web site like cnn.com. I realize that even major news networks can make errors, twist a story or even result to fabrication. But I have more trust in people hired to deliver the news in the name of an established news machine than a guy hanging out in his basement ranting about what HE thinks happened and delivering his thoughts as fact.
Even so, I do believe that blogging has a purpose and satisfies a void in society. People yearn to get their opinions out in the open, and thanks to constant access to technology, they can broadcast their opinions via the web with a click of a button. They can share their personal stories and viewpoints with the world and almost instantaneously receive feedback from fellow web users. This gives one a sense of importance; as David Kline said, blogging empowers. When a total stranger is writing comments on your blog--either encouraging you or expressing extreme disdain--it is gratifying to know SOMEONE cares. When you're sick of hearing feedback, or receiving none at all, from your friends, family and significant others, it can be nice to get a random opinion from cyber space.
I view blogging primarily as an outlet for commentary, not straight news. I find it odd that some bloggers go so far as to bash traditional forms of media like magazines and newspapers when the bloggers themselves are citing these sources for their own news stories. After all, they often can't be on the scene of an event reporting and gathering quotes themselves; and when they include information from these established news sources, it's like bloggers are saying they trust them enough to get it right. So then why would they want to regurgitate old news?
As I've previously stated, blogs are excellent venues to express personal opinion, bounce ideas off other web users and even share personal accounts. But even if I couldn't get ahold of a newspaper, news magazine or CNN, I probably still wouldn't turn to a random person's blog for my news.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)