The Future of Journalism

This is going to be broken up into parts.

Sure, people talk badly about the gossip magazines and say how unreliable the magazines are, but some of them have never read the magazine. Someone has to read it to be able to analyze if it is truly good or bad - so "Trashy Tabloid Analysis" will be the theme of the next few Future of Journalism & Zennie62 Media blog posts. (First posted on NikkyRaney.com & then Zennie62.com).

This may become a series in some way.
There will be a short (3 minute max) video to go along with the post where examples of good/bad journalism will be pointed out within the magazine - so that there are examples of either so that there is an example to base the opinion off of. Someone who thinks the magazines are awesome might like it without ever reading it either - just say, "Oh, I love reading that magazine." So, it's not good to judge something or form an opinion unless you fully understand it and have analyzed it (like when I did my 20+ page research paper on Fox News' Conservative Bias where I spent over a month watching Fox News and analyzing the web page and then comparing Fox to other news sources. So, I can truly say that I have a reason behind why I judge Fox - not just saying it or believing it based on hearsay or influence of those around me).

The only question is whether or not to include which magazine - because could there be a consequence in a legal aspect if I take photos of the magazine? I'm probably over thinking it.

This can be done without being bias.
This is going to be a journalistic analysis (with a bit of blog mixed in) of "trashy tabloids." Sure a lot of people call them "trashy tabloids" because of hearing what the publications report about, but most of those have never even touched the magazine. Like the way someone says they dislike something without ever actually understanding it.

An objective analysis of a magazine considered "trashy tabloid." The ones that are usually all about celebrities & scandals. (OK!, Life & Style, STAR, etc.)

So, that will start up tomorrow. The video aspect will show certain spots that have been circled with pen, etc & be able to show that I really do have a physical copy of the magazine and have done all the research first hand based on that magazine alone in regards to journalistic standards and principles (as well as which version of AP Stylebook is used; if there even is one used.)

Then the blog post accompanying will explain WHY that the publication did was GOOD or BAD. It's like a movie review, but a magazine review - without personal bias. Like pointing out a trend that the magazine may have like ALLOWING ALL INTERVIEWEES TO BE CONFIDENTIAL AND REFERRED TO AS "SOURCE" or "AN INSIDER." And then writing in a paragraph to explain WHY it's not okay for a magazine's only interviews in an article to be with an "anonymous source." These trashy tabloids need to stop only using anonymous sources within their publications - and that's something I will go into more detail about.

Hopefully if anyone that works on the staff at one of these magazines or is in affiliation with one of these magazines sees my posts the person won't take it as negative criticism or whatnot, but could possibly take my posts into consideration: I would love to interview the Editor-in-Chief at any one of the "trashy tabloids" just to find out what the manual & guidebook entails and what the Managing Editor deals with and why/how they consider themselves to be credible sources worth obtaining knowledge & news from when the sources that they are using to obtain this knowledge and news may not be credible.. and if the only source you can get for a story is an anonymous source -- then go out and try to get another interview or interview someone that WILL go on the record. "anonymous" sources are okay under certain circumstances in VERY SPECIFIC situations where there is a good need for confidentiality, but an article should NEVER only include the anonymous source. There needs to be some sort of PROOF not just a bunch of evidence (it's an analogy).

So, that will start tomorrow.
Now, it's time to go read a "trashy tabloid" while holding a pen so that I can pretend that it's the end of the print cycle and I am giving the publication a quick look-through to see if there's anything that should be fixed before it goes to print -- or if there's something very notable that should be complimented upon.

How sad, I am officially on winter break (no more school for a month), and I am basically doing all this research and work. Wow, I love journalism ; I'm a workaholic.


“To sit in judgment of those things which you perceive to be wrong or imperfect is to be one more person who is part of judgment, evil or imperfection.” -- Wayne Dyer


IASBRN

-- Nikky Raney 12/20/2010 1:11 AM (EST)


also posted on Zennie62 Media

After writing a 26 page long research paper about Fox News' conservative bias for my college English Composition class it's simple to explain why Fox News is known as the "most popular" or "most watched" news station.

"I firmly believe that respect is a lot more important, and a lot greater, than popularity."-- Julius Erving

Seriously.