Thursday, November 6, 2014

WDRB: Mail Order Brides J1

We're back with WDRB.

While checking their website for up and coming news, I saw an ad for "Russian mail order brides, tonight at 6 and 10." 

Why is this on the front page of the website? After searching for confirmation that yes, that really happened, I found a recent post on their Facebook page with a link to a story. It described a mail order business bringing brides from Russia to America. While briefly delving into the topic of domestic violence, the article focused on the mail order business itself. The headline states, "Prospect business owner says mail order bride company is just another way to start a love story."

The story is certainly interesting, but why is this relevant to the local audience? Domestic violence is a serious issue, but it is just barely discussed. Why is this story important? Most of its information describes how the business works, interviews one or two people involved in the business, and doesn't follow the principle of fairness. If domestic violence was the main topic of the article, then to be fair, get a quote from someone concerned about the danger of being a mail order bride. If that was not the main point of the article, don't include something and barely cover it.



In conclusion, where does this story belong? Not on the front page. Perhaps Lifestyle? Entertainment?

WDRB J1

BREAKING NEWS: It's football time!

On October 18, 2014, the news station WDRB had "no new" as stated by the group. It was all football. All of the stories listed for that night of news were online, coming to a total of 12, one third of which was fluff. Other news stations, such as WLKY, WHAS, and WAVE all produced stories on the television that night. 

That night for WDRB was all sports coverage. The ACC (Atlantic Coast Conference) website shows that the event covered was a Red-White scrimmage between U of L and NC State. (We won, by the way.) 

While this event is locally relevant, does it fulfill the yardstick of newsworthiness? As local news, no. If WDRB had a sports block to cover that story in, then it would be perfectly acceptable.

ACC events Louisville: http://www.theacc.com/#!/school/lou
WDRB website: http://www.wdrb.com/

Stuff on Fluff J1

And now for your nightly fluff online at WHAS.

For the past ten weeks, WHAS 11 News has had the most fluff/celebrity/other stories on their news website. While they do a great job of keeping fluffy stories off of their broadcast news, it dominates their website. Amassing a total of 101 stories online over these ten weeks, it has the most stories online than any other of the stations observed. WAVE 3 News had a total of 32 stories, WLKY had 10 stories, WDRB had 23, and the Courier-Journal Online had 86 total celebrity/fluff stories.

This brings us to the yardstick of newsworthiness. While WHAS as a business wants to attract consumers, it must also follow the 9 principles and 7 yardsticks of journalism. The seventh principle, "make the important interesting, not the interesting important" also applies here. While WHAS as a business wants to attract consumers, it must also take care to balance what the public wants and what the public needs.

An example of a non-newsworthy story would be "Reality TV's new extreme: Being "Eaten Alive" by a giant anaconda snake." Credited to ABC News, the story appeared on WHAS's website, more like a blurb than an article. 


While certainly interesting, this story isn't necessarily important. It is not the job of the media to provide a look at what's new on the television. It violates the seventh principle as previously mentioned. So, WHAS, what's up with all the fluff? 

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

Response to Kathryn Minor J1

While I agree with the statement that WLKY did a good job of limiting celebrity news, I feel that their crime stories were newsworthy. The crimes featured would impact those affected for a long time. For viewers living in the area where the accident took place, hearing about the crimes committed will inform them of important things happening around them. This follows the yardstick of local relevance.

" I feel like all news organizations should strive to make significant articles for their viewers rather than cater to the viewers desire to be entertained. " -Kathryn's Minor's Blog

While this is something news organizations should do, I feel that the crime stories shown weren't shown as a form of entertainment. It was not clear why WLKY was showing so many crime stories taking place in court, but I do not feel this is what the public desires.

Check out the blog post here: 

WLKY 1 J1

For the past ten weeks, a group of classmates and I have been watching the six o'clock news for the station WLKY (We're in Louisville Kentucky). We documented the stories we saw on the news by writing down headlines and classifying them by content in order to critique our chosen station. 

In our very first log, the head story (the first story aired) was all over the Fern Creek shooting that had taken place earlier that day. The online headline, however, was the riverfront Tumbleweed restaurant going for broke. 

Throughout the ten weeks, my group noticed an influx of crime stories. It dominated the station. While alerting the public that there is crime in Louisville, I feel that many crime stories create a sense of danger and wariness. What we see on the media has the ability to influence our mindset and how we feel about the world. There's also the misconception that "if it's on TV, it must be true." However, my group also noticed that WLKY avoided fluff, both on the website and live show. Fluff is defined by celebrity news and things not locally relevant, like that awesome viral kitten video on YouTube.

I also noticed the number of national and international stories on WLKY. Renowned as a strictly local news source with a slogan of "Live, Local, Late Breaking," WLKY lacked coverage on the Ebola crisis. The only mention of Ebola was on the website, stating that national airports would be screening incoming travelers for Ebola, a disease which has been terrorizing South Africa and has been brought over to the United States. The WLKY website contained slightly more stories pertaining to national coverage.

Read the Ebola story here: 

Recordings J1

Way back when, recordings were a big thing. Music used to be something rare that you only heard on special occasions, like at the village dance. It wasn't like setting a record on a record player and setting the needle down; you had to find someone who knew a song, someone to play as musical accompaniment, and maybe then you'd get to listen. Of course, people were way too busy trying to survive to indulge your whims and sing a bit.

Until we get to Thomas Edison. He invented the phonograph, which a more fragile version of the record player. It recorded sounds and you could play them back again and again until the tin foil ripped. It was also impossible to reproduce perfectly; the original message would always be the best.

After that came the Berliner gramophone, not ten years later in 1887. His gramophone followed the general idea that Edison's phonograph did: record sound, play it back. His metal disks weren't as fragile as tin foil and were reproducible. Suddenly, records were becoming forms of communication. You could listen to the words of a loved one long after they were gone.

However, it wasn't until the 1920s that recordings became a form of mass communication. It was the birth of pop (popular) culture. Everyone on the street could listen to the latest recording by a famous band and talk about it. Recordings, by then, could be rapidly mass produced. Audio became electricity and with that came microphones and speakers.