Journalism pieces

After completing Bennet's "Against Long-Form Journalism" and watching theatlantic.com's video, I have a better understanding of the war against long-form journalism and how "new media" has transformed old practices of journalism.

In Bennet's article, he discusses his concerns with the topic of long-form journalism, especially the name itself. He states to his readers that the name "long-form" completely throws off anyone that is interested in reading that sort of work because it makes it sound unappealing. Bennet supports his opinion with the simple example that readers do not recommend a book, such as Moby Dick, for the reason that it is a lot of words to read. Bennet brings to light the term "New Journalism" because it would more than likely attract more of an audience as compared to the term "long-form."

"New Journalism" in a sense connects to theatlantic.com's discussion of "new media" versus "old media", in which various journalists discussed the importance of old media learning from new media to be faster, engage a more variety of voices in conversation, and to create a stronger, more professional environment. I feel as though, besides the concern that there is a lack of printing being done, journalism can be more positively impacted by new media because it presents the opportunity to journalists to include more views in their work which appeals to a wider audience. New media can also enhance old print journalism to be more accessible.

New media, however, can also bring limitations to journalism that would not have existed otherwise. When forms of journalism are more accessible by the public, this places "more responsibility on consumers in finding out who to trust." Unfortunately, writers on the Internet have power to edit, steal, and twist the truth of others to sound more appealing to readers, which ultimately means that consumers need to critically read presented information and research on their own beyond what is in front of their face. Another limitation of new journalism is that readers pick and choose what they want to read; the flipping of a newspaper page allows the reader to stumble upon new sources of information that they wouldn't otherwise find on the Internet because stories and corresponding sites are simply not structured that way.

I think it is crucial that Bennet included a part in his article that mentions the important transition from print to digital that many journalists are undergoing at this point in time. In recent past, media and technology has changed magazine printing, typing, and art in general. My parents, both magazine cover artists, lost their jobs in Manhatten to uprising computer technology and robots. Although this influence of new media on old journalism seems like a contemporary problem, it isn't. Artists have adapted to new technology, such as computer animation, which means that writers have to adapt to the new technology (Facebook and Twitter) as well. If it means jobs and the number of readers will be at risk, journalists will find a way to compromise with new media and use it to their advantage.

Social Media and Journalism

     The published pieces from the Atlantic speak for each other. In the article " Against 'Long-Form Journalism' " we are reading information that takes much longer to read than the video "How is Social Media Changing Journalism" which makes similar points in much less time. "Against 'Long Form Journalism' " comes from one point of view arguing that brevity is important and that the way magazines categorize works is important as well. Bennet asks: "Reader, do you feel enticed to plunge into a story by the distinction that it is long?" By asking this seemingly rhetorical question we notice the importance of cutting out unnecessary words that cause works to become over-lengthy. The world's greatest novel writers cut out extra elements in their stories to keep the mystery and the reader can then put the pieces together as they read and fill in the rest with their imagination. As long as the reader is able to maintain the point you are making that is the only thing you need to convey in a successful piece- nothing extra.  Writers may sometimes lose importance and understanding of their readers because of the length. Bennet addresses the notion that long stories are not always of good quality by stating "editors are discovering that not just headlines but overall quality matters more and more, whether a story is short or long." This statement is important because he is reinstating that extra words don't make things better but also that short pieces are not always the good pieces either. The quality of a good work, to Bennet, means that it's good on its own and it covers all the points that it needs to, without overdoing it or overwhelming the reader. Toward the end of his article Bennet states that "Length is hardly the quality that most meaningfully classifies these stories. Yet there’s a real conundrum here: If long-form doesn’t fit, what term is elastic enough to encompass the varied journalism it has come to represent, from narrative to essay, profile to criticism?" There is a clear danger in advertising long pieces, as "Long- Form" because of the negative reaction to the time it may consume to read it. The time however takes nothing away from quality and I believe that is the point he has been trying to allude to. 

     Social Media is a way where authors can hit on the main points and share ideas in a faster, more effective, free way. "How Social Media is Changing Journalism" interviews a few different people who's opinions agree that it has changed journalism. One of the interviewees makes the point that social media allows a direct connection to people and works. Another states that the internet and social media reaches to speak to a wider audience and I think that a lot of the reason for that is because internet news can travel much faster to people than printed works. Another interviewee talks about the importance of people participating with the works, which I think is also very important. People can share internet works simply by a screen shot of the page or a copied link. Other countries can see things as well and people can weigh in on works through social media unlike they can in printed works. This phenomenon, for me adds even more attention and praise to the works. If people like them they will share them more and more no matter the length. The quality will matter more online where you can read things on the go rather than hard copy. A man who was interviewed in the video stated that " If something does not succeed on Facebook, it does not succeed at all." This is a bold statement that I believe as a social media user is true. The internet/ social media world is so important for modern journalism because you can get your ideas out there for free and people can share them. The concern that lies between social media and journalism in the video is that the consumer (readers) have the responsibility to themselves to know who/ what to trust. Not everything you read will be true and this especially is a valid point when it comes to the internet. All opinions vary and people can be biased and appear professional when they are not. The social media consumers must be educated enough to decipher the trustworthy works from the counterfeit works. 

Journalism: the changing idea

The video “How is Social Media Changing Journalism” Does make some major points about the ever-changing idea of Journalism. This video had some very good points, but something personal in my life is helping me see this change greatly. My sister, Allison Watkins is a journalist at Huffington Post. One of the major arguments that she raises is how social media is a great way of expanding one’s reaches to the public. The idea of who does one trust though, as brought up in the video is something I tend to disagree with. Sources are usually pretty easy to tell, and I find myself personally trying to stay towards more, lets say “respected sources” on matters covered by journalists, but that doesn’t mean that just because an article is long, means that it is filled with information and knowledge. Many times writers and authors, and I do mean all authors (myself included) perform the art of what I like to call B.S.ing and article. This is to make it lengthier, and seem more filling. The article “Against ‘Long-term Journalism” makes a perfect point of this. “Length is hardly the quality that most meaningfully classifies these stories” I personally don’t think that length should even be considered as a classification to stories. I find that if a story is interesting, or covering a topic that catches my attention, that’s why I read it. It does not matter length. Nor do I find it wrong how I find. In honesty, Most are found through social media sites such as Twitter or Facebook. A teacher of mine said something about this subject that I have taken to heart, called the two C’s 

“Communication Changes”

Whether or not Social Media is a new era of journalism or how an article is set up in content or length means nothing, only that it is what is here and now. And we must learn to work with it or let this way of communication fall apart.

Old an New Journalism: Coming to Terms

These two pieces about the future of journalism were interesting for me to read, and I compared them to my experiences with print and digital media. The Atlantic video How Is Social Media Changed Journalism? brings up many good points about new, being online resources, and old, being print and other mediums, journalism and the reader.  Many of the goals of new journalism involves reaching a larger audience and the sharing of an article or news piece.  Facebook is specifically mentioned as a means to spread articles.  A woman in the video specifically mentions that old media can learn the ability to move quicker, bring more voices into the conversation to create a conversation.  This compromise between media types is necessary to reach a larger audience and maintain this audience in new media.  The other text Against 'Long-Form Journalism' the author, James Bennet, challenges the term 'long-form journalism' for the negative connotations it has, mostly due to the words used itself. This piece seems to be written for writers, a cry to take back long-form journalism and apply it to this online media.  He even gave examples of online pieces that have succeeded as long form in this tricky medium.  However, this piece rarely includes the reader's point of view. he talks about his love of long-form journalism, but not from a reader's perspective. He does not focus on how to refresh the term 'long-form journalism' an apply it to this new journalism.  The video mentions that new media should reach a larger audience and have the ability to move quickly, which might be most easily done with shorter article or other pieces.  This is not inherently bad, however, where short articles thrive, long-form journalism will suffer.

Journalism Article and Video Response

Every year the world we live in becomes more technologically advanced. We have access to everything digitally. You can search your unanswered questions and have the answer within less than a second. Rather than continuing to subscribe to magazines or newspapers you can access them online. Television shows and movies are provided on websites where you only have to pay an average of eight dollars a month. You can search videos on how to do your hair and makeup and save yourself hundreds of dollars. Considering everything is at our fingertips, our attention spans are becoming limited. All of this technology and the advancements we are continuously adapting to are causing some complications to what we used to know so well.

James Bennet tries expressing to his audience that the term “long-form journalism” has a negative connotation. When we hear that something is long, such as a movie or novel, majority of the population is now hesitate due to the fact that everything in our world right now is so immediately available to us. “In the digital age, making a virtue of mere length sends the wrong message to writers as well as readers.” This statement was the most profound among the entire article. Length has a major effect on the results a writer receives nowadays. It’s sad when you think about it because now writers are forced to shrink their thoughts and simplify them, which could ultimately change the entire meaning of what they are trying to say.

Bennet specifically mentions his personal experience and frustration he faced when his writing needed to be shortened or he needed to decide between which examples to include and which to exclude in his writing. He was frustrated at the current time yet Bennett realized why these cuts and edits had to be made. If the continuation of “long-form journalism” carries on, it can be dangerous considering we associate the term with an extensive piece consisting of a large amount of words. Yes, journalism is changing, and Bennet makes this point extremely clear. On the other hand, Bennett is trying to make his readers ask themselves “Why are we shortening the length of writer’s projects?” While satisfying the reader is a key priority, the main priority the writer should be considered about is getting their point across no matter the length.

While we are constantly communicating with those around us through our devices and can get any answer we need in less than a second, we cannot forget how important it is for us to remember how to be able to concentrate on something for more than sixty seconds. All of these advancements we’ve made are significantly profound but so is being able to read and fully process something that is more than two pages long. While everything is becoming related to technology, because society has become so immune to it, we cannot neglect the past. In The Atlantic video, one of the men interviewed said, “To me there is really not old media there is just how quickly are you taking what is good from the past and kind of adding new ideas to it.” I agree with this statement but I believe there is much more that goes into it. Yes, while we adapt to the changes in our lifestyle it is extremely important to take what’s valuable from the past and incorporate with the future, but we should not neglect it altogether.

As a future educator, I firmly believe that technology should be incorporated into the classroom. On the other hand, I also believe that old classroom styles should be included as well. For example, writing keynotes on the board for your students is okay and it is beneficial to provide the students with handouts for reading assignments rather than them do it online. Reading assignments online can lead to distractions and I personally cannot concentrate and fully comprehend the information when I read something online. “Long-form journalism” sounds like something nobody would actually be interested in, although we cannot let society forget how important reading is. Length can be extremely detrimental considering people simply cannot handle reading pieces of writing so long, but that does not mean we cannot reverse the curse that we have created upon ourselves.

The Future of Journalism

I believe that with increased popularity of online journalism, the need for shorter and more condensed forms of articles comes with it. The Atlantic video “How is Social Media Changing Journalism?” talks about how social media has changed the journalism to reach a wider audience that is easily accessible to mostly anyone. Both this video and “Against ‘Long-Form Journalism’” in the Atlantic talk about the idea of “new journalism” and “old journalism”. Though both of these pieces have a different take on these concepts where the video believed that ultimately old and new journalism is the same and the article believed that new journalism has a lot of different expectations I believe that the concept of new journalism has a lot to do with the brevity social media has brought to journalism. “Against ‘Long-Form Journalism’” speaks a lot about how the term “long-form” can have a negative connotation in today’s society’s eyes. For an example, when I watched the video of the Atlantic I found that extremely easy to get through a 2 minute 19 second video and never lost my attention. Where reading the article took a little more effort and time where I looked at other tabs and even got up to get a glass of water and talk to my roommate across the hall for a minute before I could re-involve myself in the article. I think that the new age of social media and just technology in general has gave the phrase “long-form” a bad connotation, but not purposefully. This is the way our generation’s minds have been trained with the fast pace of twitter with only 140 characters allowed and Facebook where most articles have highlighted bullet points so that the reader does not have to read the full article to get the point across. 

Forwarding "how social media is changing journalism" and "Against long form journalism"

            When reading the first journalism piece “Against Long Form Journalism” by Bennet, one part in particular caught my eye. She spoke about how editors “trim the fat” off stories or articles to make them fit a specific part. She says they “took all the color out”. This was obviously a frustration for her until she herself became an editor and was on the other end.

            This idea lends me to think of other things that the “fat is trimmed off” in our society. Not only has the media perfected this, but they also use it against celebrities, and people in general to cause drama out of fabrications. They could take a perfectly innocent story and blow it up into some tragic, misleading catastrophe. For instance, the new story that olympian Bruce Jenner is becoming a woman, this is one of the newest fabrications to date. Just because he has grown out his hair and is going through a divorce with his wife, the media has taken these two seemingly unrelateable facts and linked them together. So yes, currently according to the tabloids, Bruce Jenner is becoming a woman. They are taking a sensitive subject for anyone that has gone through divorce and blamed his and his wife’s decision on separating on his decision to want to be a woman. The media really thrives on lies, and the hurt they cause people, just by the rewards in revenue they get for the stories they produce.

            This then leads me to think of the insensitivity the media has for other celebrities going through tough times in their lives. For instance, Patrick Swayze who is now not with us, was constantly photographed until his death in a very rude and public matter. No one should have to go through the devastating truth of knowing they are going to die at a young age, but to have it publicized to the whole country is on another level. People may say that celebrities should know what they are getting into when they reach fame and it is their own fault that their lives are broadcasted on a country wide level. This is where I think we have failed as human beings.

            What happened to our sensitivity? It makes me question how we can treat other human beings that are just the same as us in such a barbaric way. I am sure everyone was bullied in school when they were younger and it is a shame that we can not learn from the pain we were put through at a young age and inflict it on others as we grow older. No one is willing to put themselves in others shoes and think of others before their own greed and that is what makes the media and the people associated with it ugly and immoral.

            I know a lot of campaigns are being put in place to stop bullying at younger ages, but what about bullying that happens as adults? Much can be said about our society on the way we treat others, and from what has gone on I think it says very little about us. Which leads me to my next point about the video “How social media is changing Journalism”. In the video they said that if an idea does not succeed on Facebook then it most likely would not “succeed” later on in real life.

            This goes back to my spiel on bullying, if children, just like “the ideas” spoken about in the video, are bullied and do not think they can succeed in real life because of the consequences of bullying like a lack in confidence and not having friends, then this creates a huge issue. Everything that happens in childhood affects the person you will one day become. Some children do not even make it that far. Bullying is a prevalent issue in our society and children are committing suicide left and right from this issue. Just last month, a 10 year old child from my elementary school hung himself one morning because he did not want to attend school because another kid told him he was going to beat him up. Imagine the fear in a ten year old that would make him commit such a crime to himself.

            As a future educator, this will be one of the things I will have zero tolerance for. I think it is a teacher’s duty to protect his or her students and I plan to meet this head on. I never want my students to feel as if they cannot come to school or be scared to the point where they would injure themselves before they let others injure them. I always think what I would say to my class on the first day of school when I go over the protocol of my classroom, the rules and what not; and bullying has always been at the top. I will try my hardest to protect my students from bullying so that they don’t feel that they will not “succeed” at the hand of someone else’s torment.