Nikky Raney Quick Vlog Update
Showing posts with label nikky raney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nikky raney. Show all posts
Upcoming video: Interview DOs & DON'Ts by Nikky Raney
The next Journalism 101 video will discuss and act out the dos and don'ts of interviews. The interviews are specifically for print or web - not the type of interviews a broadcast journalist would conduct for a television show or any other sort of broadcast.
The video will help show how to conduct interviews with a few small but important tricks to getting the best experience & best information out of every interview.
A preview of a few of the dos and don'ts include:
- Don't interrupt your source.
- Don't ask misleading questions.
- Ask questions that only that person can answer.
- Don't rely on digital recorders - make sure to take notes.
- Prepare questions beforehand, but don't feel like you need to stick to those questions.
More to come. Josh Grattan will assist in acting out and showing how the dos and don'ts apply.
"An investigation may take six months. A quick interview, profile, a day." -- Diane Sawyer
Just a quick preview/catch up video:
Social Network: the Facebook movie by Nikky Raney
The movie "Social Network" directed by David Finch has just come out with its trailer. Nikky Raney's input on the movie which comes out October 1, 2010.
note: I have always called him David Finch ever since Seven came out, because it was a joking nickname. I probably should have mentioned that. His name is David Fincher, for anyone who was confused.
Nikky Raney's Business Card
I thought I should create a business card so that I don't always have to type my information out with every post:
Maybe I should get physical business cards as well. I think it'd be worth the money.
I'll be making some great updates soon. :)
Journalism 101 : RECAP of Blogger vs Journalist
The previous post included the video for Journalism 101: Blogger vs. Journalist.
In case the video didn't make the points clear enough here is what was learned:
- Journalists can also double as bloggers, but a blogger isn't automatically a journalist.
- Journalists go out and get their own interviews for articles, but when a journalist is blogging interviews are not required
- Journalists must be objective when covering features or hard news stories. When a journalist is blogging it may be treated like an editorial: no interviews, opinion backed up by lots of secondary research and a strong argument.
- Bloggers can include opinions within blog posts, journalists can include opinions when blogging as a blogger.
- Objectivity is required for articles, but blog posts do not require complete objectivity.
- Bloggers use articles as a basis for their blog posts, and are able to use articles from news sources in order to back up their arguments.
- Articles are objective and get both parts of an argument.
My next BLOG post will go more in depth to the differences of blogging and being a journalist. I had thought the differences were quite apparent, but some people are going off on me and calling me a bad JOURNALIST for showing opinions in my BLOGS. Just because I'm a JOURNALIST doesn't mean I can't be a BLOGGER.
There's a good article to read specifically about this from Nieman Reports called "When Journalists Blog: How it changes what they do."
I would like to share a special note of encouragement that I received from my friend Kristen. Check out her blog 365 Brand New Days:
"Don't aim for success if you want it; just do what you love and believe in, and it will come naturally. " -- David Frost
Skype's Impact on The Future of Journalism (Part One)
This blog entry may seem a bit scattered. I apologize, I try to keep posting regularly without going more than a few days without a post. I recently was awake for a period of over 72 hours, and I have finally gotten some sleep. So, I hope that this entry doesn't seem a bit too scattered.
I have mentioned previously that I truly believe the best way to conduct an interview is face-to-face. Throughout my experience and taking an Interpersonal Communications course I know that face-to-face interaction is the best way to communicate with another person in order to achieved a shared meaning.
Skype has proven to be a way to communicate with another person that is very similar to "face-to-face" interaction. Any sort of video chat can be comparable to face-to-face, but there are always technological errors that may occur. From my own experience I know that Skype can cut in and out, or the quality could be not so great, etc.
But, for the sake of interviews and getting a reliable interview I truly believe that Skype may prove to be a better method than a phone call. Skype can be used instead of face-to-face interviews in situations where the person you are interviewing is across the country, in another country, or is unable to meet with you for any variety of reasons. I am not saying that Skype should be used instead of face-to-face, but I think that it should be considered as a means of interviewing someone instead of a phone call or an e-mail.
Skype is very beneficial toward the future of journalism. It's a great technological advancement that allows journalists to conduct interviews "face-to-face" in times when being physically face to face is not possible.
To be continued. Sorry for the lack of posting here. These posts take a lot of time and effort, and the celebrity guilty pleasure posts are easier, because I am basing my post on the actions/posts of others. Where as here I am posting my own ideas, etc. I enjoy posting for Zennie62.com, because it takes my mind off things and let's me let out annoyance I may have, or any coverage/opinions I have about certain things in media. The Future of Journalism is my truest passion, and I will make an effort to spend more time posting here. *cheers*
"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity." -- Einstein
Tila Tequila's Army will put Hitler's to Shame.. with the help of God.
My friend Andrea and I have made a youtube vlog entry that will explain the headline.
Tila claiming she will outdo Hitler's army. Tila's claims of Rihanna and Katy Perry signing their souls to the devil. Defamation and lies. Tila and her blasphemy. And the fact that we don't hate Tila. So watch it, it's seriously entertaining & worth the watch.
Originally posted here
Nikky Raney Vlog
Just watch it:
Watch it; it's great stuff. Expect more vlog posts from videos I made with my friend Andrea. This is a 4 am vlog post, please appreciate it. :) Expect longer and more informative blog entries later tonight. I am motivated
Tila Tequila Fans Attack My Youtube Video - Funny
Looks like I am a big enough deal for "Tilafanfaraway" to talk about me on Tila's site. Which, we know that account is actually Tila. Look at what she had to say:
That's pretty funny. Thanks Tila, I love the attention just as much as you.
P.S. Being 20 years old, 5 foot 5 at 115 pounds isn't fat.
How many posts have I made specifically stating that I am not trying to attack or hate on Tila? Unlike the public figure that Tila is, defamation of me is a lot easier to prove.
I have made it very clear I am not trying to attack Tila.
Nikky Raney
Strange any other comment that has my name in it gets auto-deleted. Seriously, when anyone writes "nikky" in the comments the post is auto-deleted, but somehow that account could bypass that? Maybe it's because that account is actually Tila.
Interviews -- Part 1
I am sorry for delaying this blog entry. With my birthday just passing, and some other very personal/upsetting situations arising it has been hard for me to keep my head on straight. I have been somewhat of an emotional train wreck, but I am going to attempt to at least begin this blog entry and see what comes of it.
Who to interview?
You want to interview people who can give you the information and quotes that NO ONE else can. Ask the person the question that only THAT PERSON can answer. That is really important.
So, if you are doing an article about the Dover, New Hampshire police station laying off police officers there are many different interviews to obtain and questions to ask.
The chief of police would be asked much different questions than one of the newest rookie cops. You would need to do research to find out who is at the top of the "food chain." Find out WHO made this decision and WHY this decision was made. Ask those people questions that can ONLY be answered by that person.
There are many angles to take on the story.
Whether it be the angle of why the downsizing is happening, how this is going to affect the crime rate, the impact this is having on the families, etc. You would not ask one of the police officers being laid off (as a first question), "What is your favorite memory of being on the job?" No, that is not the right question to ask in this sort of situation. A better question would be, "What was your reaction when you found out you were one of the police officers being let go?"
Actually, I think I want to move to another topic about interviews.
HOW TO CONDUCT INTERVIEWS.
Face-to-Face is the #1 best way to conduct an interview. That way you are speaking straight to the person. You see all the NON-VERBAL communication, and you can notice the tone of voice. You can "feel the presence" of the person and the vibes of the situation. Whether or not the person is feeling tension or relaxed. You are able to re-word and pose your questions differently in order to keep your source feeling at ease. You are able to get the best quotes straight from the person on the spot. You can ask follow up questions and you are really able to connect with the person and form somewhat of a "bond" with one another. The reporter always wants to protect the sources, and the sources need to know that they can trust the reporter.
Phone interviews may not always be great, because you never know who is in the room with that person telling them what to say. You don't get to see the look on the person's face. You may not even be speaking with the right person. Even if you know the person's voice you can never be 100% certain that the person you are speaking with is the person he or she claims to be.
E-mail interviews should be LAST resorts. The person cannot interpret your questions the way you may intend them to be interpreted. They could be perceived in a negative way. The person has time to backspace, reword, rephrase and PRACTICE the quote that will be given and published. The person is able to "rehearse" the quote and make sure that it sounds great.
The person could also be having someone ELSE write the e-mail for them. Someone ELSE could be typing the answers. The e-mail account could also be hacked, and in that case the person responding is not the person that the interview was intended to be with.
That's all I have for now.
My brain is in shambles right now, and I am sorry that I am allowing my personal problems interfere with my blogging personality.
It's actually a big stress reliever when I go on Zennie62.com and blog and expose Tila Tequila's lies. Guilty pleasures are still pleasures.
Cheers, I'll continue you this later.
I will discuss SKYPE in my next part of the interview blogs.
(p.s. Tom from Myspace is following me on Twitter!)
Quickie
So here's a quickie
My 20th birthday is tomorrow, June 7, 2010.
I will probably blog again on Tuesday or Wednesday.
Zennie wants me to keep doing Tila Tequila coverage for Zennie62.com since my blog posts are clearly making an impact & actually have influenced her. I have gotten to the point where if you type my NAME "nikky" in her comments the comment will be instantly deleted. I'm serious, go try it.
Too much Jersey Shore.
Watched the MTV movie awards.
Twilight won almost everything.
The end MTV missed three "fucks" that went uncensored.
Luckily the FCC is more lenient when it's after 11 pm.
I am going to work on my interview blog entry for the future of journalism
& maybe do some more vlogging in addition.
It's11:20 pm - I am going to go to sleep & then celebrate my birthday tomorrow.
:
Nikky Raney: Journalist & Blogger
I was very happy to receive this e-mail with the interview questions, but I think that interviews should never be done through e-mails. E-mails should be a last resort to the way to interview a source. I will do a blog entry about interviewing next, because I think that the future of journalism needs to not rely on technology for everything. Face-to-face interviews or phone interviews are the best way to get credible and accurate information, because you can hear the tone of voice, and you are able to ask follow-up questions. When you interview via e-mail you are limited. You cannot hear the tone of voice, and you cannot pick up on any other non-verbal communication, which is critical to interpersonal communication.
Anyway, I was deeply offended by one of the questions I was asked. It was not even a question, really.
"You have many pictures of yourself on your page and was wondering if you could comment about how your public persona may or may not be perceived as someone interested in so-called "serious" journalism.
I could be missing this here but this could be part of the "celebrity" journalism you are also writing about."
I could be missing this here but this could be part of the "celebrity" journalism you are also writing about."
I think that I need to make this clear and concise to those who read my blog entries for both web sites. So, here is the answer I gave him:
"Okay, I am into serious journalism and my track record can prove that to you. I was apart of the Hillary Clinton campaign, and I am extremely interested with political and governmental affairs. Newsweek is my favorite magazine. My public persona may not seem that way, but my experience speaks for itself. As for the "celebrity" blogging. That is blogging, not reporting. That is not journalism, that is blogging. I was given an offer from Zennie Abraham, and I would never turn down an offer to write for a blog that was recognized and on TMZ's blogroll. It was a great opportunity to put my name out there and to slowly build my way up. It's baby steps. I am slowly trying to incorporate journalism into those blog posts. If you go to my website Nikkyraney.com, The Future of Journalism, you will see that the blog entries I write on that site will archive back and show that I truly am apart of "serious" journalism. I like to use photos of myself, because I like to be original. I don't want to just steal photos from google images and post them as my own. I did modeling for a while, and I quit modeling for journalism. This is also why I am interested in PRINT journalism. I do not to be judged by my looks. My public persona on Zennie62.com is mostly being critical of those who claim to be journalists (such as Perez & Tila) I was given this opportunity from Zennie, and I am thankful and glad. But it is a blogging opportunity. I would hope that I wouldn't be judged by that, but if I am then anyone can link back to my own website and see the truth. That question actually offended me a bit, because I would like to break the mold and be able to write about everything. I am a 19-year-old (soon to be 20), and I think that it is okay for me to do the celebrity blogging, because it is not easy to get those hard hitting investigative stories without a degree to show. I was a paid freelance columnist my senior year of high school for Foster's Daily Democrat. I would hope that people would not judge me based on my "celebrity blog entries," but on my actual articles that I have done, and for all the hard work and dedication I obviously have put into my career. If you read my blog entries for my own website you will see how highly critical I am of the media and sensationalism."
The reason I posted this was because: if he has that opinion of me - then he must not be the only one. When I started doing the celebrity blog entries, I knew that I would get some flack for it. If you actually read those posts though, the one entry in which I completely let loose and show the side of a true blogger is the recent blog entry that dealt with Tila Tequila calling herself a journalist. That outraged me.
I am extremely grateful and love being able to blog for Zennie62.com, but I don't want the role of "celebrity blogger" overtake my public persona. I am going to take that information, and I will try to show a more serious side to my blog posts. It is difficult to blog about the serious hot topics, because I want to go in and get my own interviews. I want to be at the scene. I want to go out and get my own photos. I want to be out there doing everything that a journalist does, because journalism is my passion.
I hope that this will clear the air. I want to be able to have recognition for being able to blog about the "entertainment" side of things, but also that I can report & write about the other matters. I would like to be able to serve all audiences.
The blog entries I have done on "Facebook Privacy" are definitely directed at a different audience than the blog entry I wrote about "Tila Going To Rehab." Just as the sources I cite for each are different. I make sure that I cite and use credibly sources within my blog entries.
I will keep this in mind during my future blog posts.
My next blog post for this blog will be about INTERVIEWS.
The way to conduct interviews, who to interview, etc.
I think that a big part of the future of journalism is being able to conduct the proper interviews with the reliable and credible sources, and the way to get in touch with these sources.
I do feel honored that I was chosen to be interviewed for this book - don't get me wrong. I also attribute that to the traffic and exposure I have received due to writing for Zennie62.com. I am not ashamed of any of my blog entries. I put all my blog entries into a document before I post it onto the web. I think that a better way to conduct the interview would have been to ask if it would be possible to call me, and to better explain why I am being chosen. I give him credit for the way he phrased the "question." So, if you would like to give me a follow-up interview I am willing to talk to you on the phone and discuss any further questions you may have.
I respect anonymity, and I did not think it would have been respectful or necessary to post who wrote the e-mail, because I could be wrong on his intentions. I may have gotten it all wrong, but the phrasing and way I perceived it made me feel offended. That is another part of why e-mail is not a good way to get interviews. I mean, what if my e-mail was hacked? Then the hacker would have e-mailed him back all sorts of random crap.
This is part of the reason why I admire Hunter S. Thompson. He could report and write whatever he pleased, and he was still known as a serious journalist. I can read Fear and Loathing in America over and over again, it is my all time favorite book. I love seeing the faxes and letters sent back and forth. I love how you can see his personality and the behind the scenes of what he was thinking as he wrote. I strive to reach that level, but I would like to be able to instill a bit more objectivity into reporting.
P.S. "Celebrity" news (Entertainment) is not any less news than sports, health, political, international, etc. It is a different beat, but that does not mean it is not important. The way the articles/blog entries are written are crucial to the understanding of what is being written about. Don't judge an article by its headline or topic. Actually read through and see what sort of interviews and information is being presented, and if there has been a credible source. I am sick of seeing the "an insider says" or "a friend close to the family." I want there to be a name. Find someone who will go on record and give a reliable quote.
That's all for now.
"In seeking truth you have to get both sides of a story." --Walter Cronkite
Objectivity and Bias: The Future Of Journalism
Objectivity and Bias.
I have a strong belief that when writing a hard news story or a feature story it should be written objectively. That means getting interviews from both sides, secondary research that supports both sides, and not inserting your opinion.
News articles should not address the reader. There should never be an "I" or a "you" or "US" or "WE." Every sentence should be attributed and justified using sources.
At the end of the article the reader should not be able to tell from the article what stance the reporter has on the issue. And I think that is a big deal. I love reading an article and wondering at the end, "Which side does he/she support?"
With hard news stories there shouldn't be a need to insert an opinion. Just report the facts. If you really want your opinion in there then interview someone (a CREDIBLE source) that you know will supply a quote that will say what you wish you could say, but then make sure to get a quote of opposition. You can also do secondary research and cite a source that shows your opinion.
When it's straight hard news it shouldn't be an issue. Let's say there was a car crash, you really don't need to say, "Oh my gosh that driver was SOOoO stupid." No, you don't need to even say an opinion. Just write the who what where when, get quotes if you can from the sources there, interview the police at the scene. If you don't feel like you have enough you can always do a follow up story and elude to that at the end of the article.
If it's a controversial hard news story, say a gay-marriage protest. Interview the protesters, but make sure to interview those that oppose the protest. Interview as many people as you can so you get a variety of quotes and then pick which ones best support the article; this goes for any story written.
Features may make it harder to show your objectivity, but it still should be done. There's more room in Features (800 words or more), and since they are IN-DEPTH stories they take longer than a few days to do. That means you definitely have enough time to get interviews from both sides of the story.
I think that the future of journalism will rely on objectivity within the hard news, and it needs to. I think it is much easier to be objective through print and web reporting, because no one can see your face. Your tone of voice is not heard.
I think that the future of journalism will allow journalists to show opinions within BLOGS. My thoughts on blogging has completely changed since 6 months ago. But I do believe that opinions should be left in blogs, columns, and editorials. I will include reviews in that, but i am a bit iffy.
Now, news sources in the media have gained reputations for being "bias" to the right or left, but even so - that doesn't mean that it's okay to show that within reporting the news.
I am focusing more on print/web journalism within this post, because that is what I am passionate for. I will write more about broadcast journalism later on, because I do have experience with that. I worked at a television station and was in a radio news reporting course. I own the stylebook for broadcast, and the college I attend has a radio station that is listened to throughout the region. (It's an alternative rock station, I love that).
I have finally allowed myself to "let loose" and show some of my opinion. I have strong opinions, but as a journalist I try to hide it and stay objective. As a blogger, I am allowing myself little by little. I will definitely NOT let that slip into my writing.
The future of journalism is going to rely on drawing a line between BLOGS and ARTICLES. Blogs can be personal, blogs don't need to be objective, but there are rules for blogging that coincide with those of a journalist.
I don't know whether to focus on credible sources, credibility, or more so bias.
This one was definitely more about objectivity, but I will go more in-depth to bias later.
I did a 20+ page paper for my English Composition class on the conservative bias of Fox News. I did that paper extremely objectively, but then allowed my opinions to show because the professor asked us to have our opinions in it. I researched my tail off. I WATCHED Fox News, I read transcripts, I read and examined articles, I compared the headlines of Fox News to the headlines of other news sources.
I compared side by side a story written/broadcasted/covered by Fox News vs. the same story covered by another station.
I gained lots of insight.
I really dislike sensationalism.
Now, I am writing for a blog that is on TMZ's blogroll - Zennie62.com.
That website has me focusing on the guilty pleasure celebrity news blogging.
This blog is my serious journalist blog, BUT I will post links and posts I do for that site so that I will be able to show what I wrote for the other blog, but this blog is dedicated and will remain dedicated to the future of journalism.
I am into serious journalism, and I think that I have shown that
But I was given an amazing opportunity to blog and to get a lot more people to read my work, and I think that if people read the "juicy celebrity gossip," then maybe they will go to "nikkyraney.com" to see what else I have written -- and they will see that even though I am a celebrity blogger - I am also a serious journalist.
I want to be able to do both.
And I want to still be thought of as a credible, trustworthy, serious journalist.
My favorite news to cover includes politics, crime, etc. but I am not able to get the interviews at the time, but I can aggregate links to other news sources within the blog posts I write for Zennie62.com. It is a way for me to basically "relax" and not feel as much pressure.
I take Zennie62.com seriously, though.
I try to never be directly critical, and when I do state an opinion I show a link/article that supports my opinion.
So, that's what I have to say about Objectivity and bias for now.
I will be posting my "WORD OF THE WEEK" in a few hours.(I work on each blog entry for at least half an hour, but usually longer).
Oh my favorite moment of the week is trading direct messages back and forth with Steve Tuttle from Newsweek (via Twitter). He read the blog entry I wrote about Newsweek and he liked it.
I am surprised that my twitter got so popular. I love following, but I never expected that I would be followed. My numbers have been going up day by day. I don't ask for followers and I hate the spam "GET MORE FOLLOWERS" crap.
But, here's my twitter.
I post a lot of re-tweeting to news articles.
I post a LOT of news articles.
I post a lot of sarcastic/funny posts.
And I am highly critical of Tila Tequila, but I'll do an entire thing on her later.
I will be doing a blog entry on "CELEBRITY GOSSIP BLOGS" and the good, the bad, and the tila tequila. Don't get me started.
Cheers :)
Thanks for all the support.
To comment, contact, suggest, etc. please e-mail me :)
If you want to be a blogger for Zennie62.com e-mail me!
(p.s. I refuse to link to Fox News, because I am BIAS.)
(p.p.s) John Draper is helping to re-design the layout of my blog. EXCITING.
The mainstream media has its own agenda. They do not want to print the facts. They have an agenda, they have a slant, they have a bias. It is outrageous to me. --Curt Weldon
It is outrageous to me too. I'll fix it, promise. And yes, I did quote a Republican politician.
Ben Marshall, your tweet made my day.
That single tweet made my day
Why did it make my day?
1) Complimenting me on my writing
2) Saying I have an impressive resume
3) Not knowing my stance on Tila.
I love when I read an article and can't figure out the person's stance on it. And I love that I am being ambiguous about what my stance is. So, Ben, you made my day. Thanks.
""Surround yourself with positive people and situations, and avoid negativity."
Experiencing the Future of Journalism -- Nikky Raney
Journalism is a team sport, but I never wanted my experience to put me in a different league.
I was one of the students at Dover High School who helped create The Tide. In 2006, Dover High School had no student newspaper, and by 2008 they had the largest student-run newspaper in New England.
We sold ads. We had strict editorial guidelines. We had graphic design. We did everything, really. We worked hard to get where we were and our advisor/publisher Dan Singer was an amazing educator.
The things he taught us helped so much.
And the three things that I think all journalists should follow were the three maxims that we had.
1)Always tell the truth.
2) It's not personal, it's about the paper.
3) Journalism is a team sport.
I was first News Editor and then Managing Editor. I get highly offended when anyone calls it a "high school newspaper," because it was far from that. We were not STUDENTS we were staffers. We were more than a class, but we were a staff. We were such a legitimate paper. We had real stories, real ads (we sold ads to places like KMART), graphic design, web-page, real money, real events and everything was just real. We had a strict manual and guidebook that we followed, but the most important thing was that we were the journalists. We were in charge, and we made it happen. We had reporters, section editors, editor in chief, business manager, ads manager, production manger, graphics manager, public relations director, community relations, etc. We had everything.
I took a year off between high school and college, and I missed journalism way too much. I needed my degree, I needed to write, I needed to edit, and I needed it immediately.
And I think that I left high school with too much experience.
Not too much experience, but the experience I had was more than others my age had. Going to college I was told by my advisor that I would be perfect to be the editor of the campus paper. He said that I had more experience with print than even the advisor to the campus paper. I interviewed the advisor to the paper, and she hired me to be the editor. I was used to the work I did at The Tide, that I thought it would be normal to assume the staffer vs. student personality. I assumed since we were so tough on every comma, every lead, everything in the articles we wrote for The Tide, that the campus paper would have even higher standards than that of the "high school paper."
I was spoken to for acting like a manager to the students. I was confused, because it was normal for me to tell other "staffers" to meet deadlines. I am very much into the "it's not personal, it's about the paper." I treated even my best friend differently when it came to writing.
I guess I was being too bossy. I wanted the writers to get multiple interviews, interviews with people that aren't their friends, use secondary research, follow AP style, fact check, copy edit, get photos, and meet deadlines. I thought that since I was the editor, I would be able to expect those things from the "reporters." But I was told that I could not expect that from the writers, because not all of them are journalism students. If you are writing for an article for a paper then you are to assume the role of a reporter.
I was not trying to be cocky. I was not trying to say that I was better than anyone else, but I was definitely trying to use the knowledge that I had gained from my past journalism experiences (writing for Foster's Daily Democrat, PR Internship at Dover Adult Learning Center, and being Managing Editor of The Tide) in order to create a great campus paper.
Journalism is a team sport, and I felt like I was going solo. It made me feel like maybe I had too much experience when it came to print journalism. My concentration is print and web journalism, and I thought that my knowledge and prior experience would help. Unfortunately, it came off as snobby when we did peer editing in class and the person who edited my paper had marked something as an error, when it was actually not an error; it had to do with AP style and commas. When I corrected him and said that he was mistaken, I was told by the teacher that we need to "all accept our mistakes." I had not made a mistake.
I got an article I wrote published in the Bangor Weekly, and I received some negative feedback from the advisor for the campus paper. She was not happy that I had something published in another publication before it was published in the campus paper.
I was just surprised that I had my things published for free. After being a paid freelance columnist for Foster's Daily Democrat and being a paid Public Relations intern at Dover Adult Learning Center, I was used to getting paid anytime my stuff was published in an outside publication. Hell, even Foster's Daily Democrat paid one of our reporters when taking an article from The Tide and publishing it into their daily paper.
My experience is a double-edged sword. It is great for showing others what I have accomplished, but it also makes me seem like I am a cocky journalist. I'm really not. I just have really strong plans for the future of journalism.
I keep being talked to about "my first job" and "when you finally get your first job as a journalist." I have already gotten my first job as a journalist. I walked in there as a journalist and was offered to be a paid freelance columnist. I was expecting to be given a story assignment and a 24-hour deadline, or I was expected to be looked at as a 17-year-old high school student. But I was judged through my EXPERIENCE. My experience was able to speak to itself, and it was able to fight off any preconceived opinions regarding my age.
Yes, I did give back criticism when "students" writing for the campus paper didn't attribute to their sources. I was told that I am not allowed to speak to students that way. I was allowed to speak that way in high school, but I can't speak that way in college? I thought that our maturity had gone up.
I always talked and was close to my personal advisor, and he was there for me to talk to about the issues. The campus paper had a new policy the second semester saying the report could not publish anything for an outside publication until it was published in the campus paper.
I would think that attending a college where a student is training to be a journalist, if an outside publication wants to publish the student's article it should be embraced. An outside publication wanting to publish the article written by a student at the college campus is a dream for college students and should make the professors feel proud. I don't think it is right to withhold a great article for a campus paper if there is an outside publication that wants to publish it.
When showing your portfolio of published clips to someone you may want to write for will it be better to show the clip from the article being published in the campus paper, or would it be better to show the clip was published in both the campus paper AND another publication?
It was never personal to me, it was about the paper.
I helped create The Tide, and I wanted to help make the campus paper even better.
I never thought that the experience I had prior would end up as a negative.
My advisor never saw it as a negative, but he wasn't the one who was running the campus paper.
I mean, I can see where it would seem like I was cocky. I would find it normal if the student editor e-mailed me asking for an article that was 723 words long and if my article was 800 words long I would expect her to be "upset" with me. Word count is important. We had some crazy (in a good way) Production Managers on The Tide. And you do not want to mess with senior girls to begin with, but to mess with a production manager who happens to also be a senior in high school is even worse. Word counts are exact.
I think that colleges need to be "strict" or "harsh" when it comes to articles. It is NOT okay to call something a "hard news" story when there are facts attributed anywhere. It is NOT okay for copy-editing to be over looked. It is especially NOT okay for fact-checking to go undone.
When I say fact-checking I mean checking every single sentence within the article. Calling up every source cited and asking if the quote is correct. Checking to make sure every single sentence that claims something as fact is attributed to a source. It also includes making sure the titles are correct and CITING CREDIBLE SOURCES. I will do a blog entry on credible sources later on.
When I say COPY-EDITING. I say get out the AP Style Guide if you haven't already and get to work. Checking every single sentence for commas. Making sure that the lead is strong. Making sure that it is an ARTICLE not an essay. Making sure to get NUMBERS correct.
I have taken Interpersonal Communications, and I believe that it is a big deal.
Journalism is a TEAM sport. We need to support each other and understand that IT'S NOT PERSONAL, IT IS ABOUT THE PAPER. Just because you worked for three weeks on an article and you are my best friend in the world doesn't mean that I won't take your article, mark it all over with red ink for edits, and then give it back to you and ask you to change it. I will probably then ask for your contact log so that I can call up your sources and check the secondary sources that are cited throughout the article. I will probably even make you go out and get another interview if I see that you interviewed your roommate, who plays basketball, about an article involving a ballet recital.
TEAM SPORT. I know there are things I can do to better myself, but it's hard to just sit back and let mistakes happen when I know they could be prevented. The excuse for "they aren't journalism students" does not make it okay. Most of the staffers for The Tide were not interested in pursuing journalism after high school, but they worked hard.
Also, we fired people on staff. No, we really did. It wasn't personal. Missing deadlines, not attending meetings, etc. could result in being fired. And since the class is worth credits re-applying to be on staff would be a smart idea. Yes, there were people who got fired.
I was told straight to my eyes from my advisor Mr. Singer, "You need to tell (name) that you are his manager and he needs to listen to you."
I was very clear that I needed to be a manager when it came to talking to my friend on staff about journalism.
Now, if I had said, "You are my manager and you need to listen to me" when I was editor for the campus paper my first semester at college as a freshman I probably would have gotten in trouble. Especially if I said that to an upperclassman.
The future of journalism is relying on colleges to teach students how to be journalists. I can't accept sugar-coating and letting a few errors go when they COULD be fixed. The future of journalism is shifting and changing.
The media already is getting enough of a beat on from one another. Every media outlet wants to out-do the other. Journalism is a team sport. We need to work TOGETHER, because we are all trying to achieve the same goal. Journalists want to inform and educate the general public on things that matter. No matter what field of journalism or what type of journalism -- credibility is something that cannot be taken for granted.
My next worry for the fall is blogging. I know Katy England is proud of me for my blogs, hell, Katy England is the whole reason I am a blogger. If it wasn't for her I never would have created this blog for her web reporting class, and I never would have ended up blogging for a blog that is on TMZ's blogroll, Zennie62.com.
I am not trying to say I am better than anyone else. I just want everyone to work together to make the future of journalism bright. I may be young (I'm 20 on June 7th), and I may have a lot of quirky qualities, but when it comes to journalism I take that so serious. Journalism truly is my life. I want journalists to be trusted. I want articles to be trusted. I want anyone who reads an article online to be able to believe that article and not to be focusing on a word that the journalist spelled wrong in the article.
I don't want an article to be read and for the journalist's credibility to be questioned. Keeping the facts attributed to sources helps with maintaining credibility, as long as there are credible sources cited. Maybe I am "old school" for wanting to maintain objectivity in journalism. I accept that bias exists within journalism, but I want to be able to read an article involving an investigative journalist's piece and not know which side of the issue the journalist is on.
I get angry at posts I see online and in papers. I go on to my friends about "that fact is not attributed to a source," "he just referred to the person by his last name, but now midway through the article he is calling him by his first name," "this story is so inconsistent with titles of people," "she doesn't even attribute that to a source," or "that is such sensationalism!" My friends look at me and blink. It's not a big deal to them because they don't understand. Those things irk me more than anything. I may have some sort of journalism-OCD.
Maybe I care too much?
I just want the Future of Journalism to be all the things I have hoped for since I was 13. I never thought that my experience would be something that would HOLD ME BACK. I guess I need to learn patience, get my degree, and let my experience speak for itself.
I had let my experience speak for itself prior, but my experience wasn't enough for some people to disregard my age.
There's a reason I stick to print and web. I did modeling before, and I sort of have that bubbly girly voice. I am pretty excitable and I talk and type faster than most people can think. I think that I can be taken most seriously via print/web. And I think that I am a lot more respectable when I am in journalism persona (blogging is different, and in blogging I fear I may be letting loose a bit too much).
My upcoming blog entries are going to deal with:
Credibility - AP Style - Interviews - Ethics - Fact Checking- Sensationalism.
You may notice that this blog entry has no links in it. Why aren't there any hyperlinks linking to other articles or other web pages that can back up the credibility behind what I said? Because for once, I am deciding not to justify myself with links and sources. For once, I am going to just spew it out and hope that I can be trusted without the sources. This will be the only blog entry I am doing this for, and I am trying to make/prove a point. If you understand the point I am trying to make let me know at nikkyraney@nikkyraney.com.
If you can honestly, after reading this, think, "Wow, she is so cocky and full of herself. She thinks she is better than everyone else. She thinks she can just boss everyone around," then I guess you will just have to continue to read my blog entries & articles. All I want is to improve and bring positivity to the future of journalism. I am 19-years-old and has already accomplished all the things that I listed above, I think that I am entitled to feel a LITTLE special.
Disclaimer: I am in no way, shape, or form attempting to defame my campus, or any of the faculty/staff members. I did not name any names, other than Katy England. I did not link to anything involving the school and/or faculty. I did not even link to the pages so that I could keep the peace. I did not use the information to rant and rag, but to educate and emphasize the points that I was making within the blog entry.
"Information's pretty thin stuff unless mixed with experience. " -- Clarence Day
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
