click on the link to read John Earls REVIEW
Hi there!
Please give our brand new song a listen and tell us what you think.
You can also check out our www.myspace.com/nussia page for more of our music.
Any comments will be much appreciated!
And of course if you like what you hear please help us spread the word.
I'll start off by saying that I will not provide any sources for this blog because it's all coming from the ol' noodle, and my own observations.
Last Saturday I was dragged out of bed early in the morning by two old ladies trying to sell me Christianity. I sat through their praise and glory, accepted their pamphlets and sent them on their way to harass my neighbors. Instead of going back to bed I decided to just stay up and clean the house.
The TV had already been on and while I was dusting the living room I became mesmerized by, of all things, the News. I normally don’t witness the Morning News Shows because I sleep the morning away in most cases. But in this rare occasion I actually watched bits and pieces of CNN (I’m pretty sure it was CNN) and from watching just parts of the show I came to the conclusion that they are desperately trying to appeal to the younger generation.
The anchors were two young individuals (of ethnic backgrounds, for diversity I suppose), and they both sat in huge plushy chairs in front of a coffee table (not a desk). They’d both banter back and forth to each other laughing and making jokes as they presented the News. While a serious story came about, which was rare and when they did they did it in clumps to get them over with, the anchors would change their persona and become serious.
They had full reports about Hillary Clinton on South Park (watch the full episode here), American Idol and other miscellaneous none newsworthy subjects. Throughout these reports the reporters would use slang and throw jokes in every once in awhile. For example they had a report about American Idol, and the reporter asked " What would happen if *so and so* would win American Idol?" and they showed old footage of an atomic bomb exploding with a huge mushroom clowd. Ok I found it humorous, but at the same time, after learning everything I've learned in my studies, that's not right.
I must admit, I was intriqued by what they were showing, but I could also see right through it all. I knew what they were doing, and why they were doing it. But after witnessing it, I asked myself; Is this the future of journalism? Is News becoming Entertainment?
As soon as I saw this subject I immediately thought of Wayne McPhails Online Journalism class. In one of the classes he pointed out the "Realities of being human." Among those realities were; "Our short-term memory is fragile, limited and easily taxed" and "Our long-term memory compresses events and is unreliable." The "Realities of being human" stated other facts about the human mind and how it works. So my initial answer to the question "How much information can we process?" was... not very much. Especially in our day and age it seems like our memory span is shrinking, and unless something is quick and simple or entertaining, we're most likely to forget it.
In an article/study for the Association for Psychological Science it states that it is hard to determine how much the human mind could actually process. Mainly because human beings automatically use problem solving skills to break down the information and make it so it's smaller and more manageable, or we make connections to remember it in more simple terms. In the study they tested individuals on problems that they were unfamiliar with, and that they couldn't chunk information together with. In the study they use the term "Variables" to define the information that the participants took-in in a specific time frame. The tests involved from as low as two "variables" to as high as five.
The researchers came up with the outcome that as the tests became harder the performance rates dropped and the confidence was lowered. As the "variables" were increased, the participants were saying things like "I kept losing information," or "I just lost track." In the end the participants were able to intake up to four portions of information, five portions were pushing it.
It's hard to say how much information a human could take in, because everyone is different. But in today's fast paced world, we have adapted ourselves to only take in short tidbits of information. We no longer read through full articles we just skim through and find the main information. We no longer watch full newscasts on TV; we would rather download and choose what we watch on our computers or on our iPods. Anything too long we flip the page, or turn the channel. If anything our information intake is low. Although the study shows that we can process four (five at max) portions of information, it doesn't necessarily say whether that is good or bad. It also doesn't specify as to whether that is low compared to the past. The test was taken in 2005, has the portions of information increased or decreased since? It's a hard question to answer and in the end, we'll never truly know.
wow, i just went through other peoples blogs and mine is really long. Sorry Darryl
In an article in businessweek.com there was a case that three blog sites posted confedential information about a secret unreleased Apple product and in return Apple took legal action. None of the bloggers posted their sources, and Apple fought by saying bloggers aren't "legitimate members of the press" and that they have the right to cough up the information. Normally journalists are protected under the First Amendment and don't have to reveal their sources. A judge for this case began a ruling that the bloggers must reveal their sources, and if the ruling holds it will mean the beginning of "Bloggers are not Journalists" according to law.
Bloggers do just as much as journalists, they gather news in intent to make it public. Bloggers want to be treated as Journalists. But the question is; should they have all the bells and whistles and the downfalls to being a journalists? In reality, it all relies on one simple question: Are bloggers Jounalists?
That question is a rather problematic question to answer and in reality it's all in the eye of the beholder. In the past few years organizations have considered blogs a valid form of journalism. In fact bloggers have received press passes, some bloggers have become media experts, and main news outlets are catching on, and taking advantage of the blog phenomena.
At the same time, bloggers have a reputation of not exactly being accurate, being opinionated, bias, or not being truthful. If a Journalist were to publish news that was inaccurate, opinionated, bias, or untrustworthy they would be charged with libel. Meanwhile bloggers have no consiquences for such actions, and in some cases they may not even be aware of their lack of credibility.
The majority of the sites found on the internet actually consider bloggers to be journalists. The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) has many strong points on their site. The EFF says that what makes a journalist a journalist is whether he/she is gathering news for dissemination to the public, not the method or medium it is published. Your chosen medium should not make a difference.
Overall, it is hard to say a possitive yes or no answer. It all depends on how you look at. If an average Joe Schmoe posts a blog that consists of news that is trustworthy, accurate and professionally put together, that average Joe Schmoe could be considered a Journalist. But if that Joe Schmoes posts a blog about inaccurate information, or only provides one side of the story that on the other hand is not journalism.
The presentation with the e-librarian was rather helpful and I took alot from it. Before the presentation I was aware of Mohawks "The Brain" but I wasn't aware of how helpful it really is. I didn't realize that almost anyone (as long as they are from Mohawk) could have access to contacts, news articles, stories, books, and sites. It's a great tool for anyone to use, but for Journalist it's a very efficient tool that could help in developing a story or finding contacts and/or information.
Also alot of sites were brought to my atention that could help me with getting statistics, informations, or contact information. Sites like Canada.gc.ca is an excellent site to find out about government information and officials contacts. Especially seeing that I know very little about the government.
If I took anything from this presentation it would be all the sites that were brought to my attention. Mainly I'll take everything I learned to find information, contacts, and statistics. I never knew where to find information and contacts but thanks to this specific presentation I know now how to do such a thing.
I'm finding that I'm repeating myself, but in reality thats all I've learned. I'll just stop typing because I have nothing more to say.
Chris
Hello,
Our Group consists of Andy, Chris, Dan C, Dan N, Meg, Sara, Colin, and Alison
Hamilton Income:
In 2004 the average income was $6,800, per capita $26,800 and 20% of homes had an income of over $100,000.
Here's some information on Hamilton Poverty:
- 20% are living below the poverty line (95, 650)
- Poverty measured by families with income below Stats Canada.
Contact:
Tackling Poverty in Hamilton # (905) 523-5600
120 King st. West, Hamilton
Suite 700
L8P 4V2
Website:
http://hamiltonpoverty.ca/docs/poverty_facts/Poverty_Quick_Facts_sheet.pdf
HA HA.. that's just plain funny...
So I am sitting in the Newsroom at the moment waiting for politics to start. I have some crappy hip hop blaring from behind me, and crazy journalism students yelling obscure and absurd comments. One of those obscure comments was " It smells like big-foots dick," and so I dedicated an entire blog to that exact comment.
I just found this rather humorous and so I started this blog. Mind you this blog is not Journalism quality, but I promised someone I'd write a blog about the comment, and I never go against my word.
I have nothing more to say...
Chris
Family Guy, Politics, and Comedy. You really can't go wrong. I found this on YouTube today, and I thought I'd share this with whomever goes on this page.
This is absolutely hilarious, and rather sad if you really think about it. Bill O'Rielly-- Author, Broadcaster,Journalist, whatever else he does-- was brave/stupid enough to go on The Colbert Report, and of course Stephen Colbert took advantage of this. He did kind of take it easy on O'Rielly, but Colbert had his shots. The Colbert Report makes fun of people like Bill O'Reilly every show they tape, for O'Reilly to go on that show it's pure insanity/stupidity. But in return, if I understood correctly, Colbert went on O'Reillys show.
Moving on...I'm not going to lie, I haven't heard of the Countdown with Kieth Olbermann until I found this video, but I like it. It is a real News show but with humour, and opinion. Pure Genius. Nothing new, or original, but genius. Olbermann interviewed Seth Macfarlane, Creator of Family Guy, about what he thought of the O'Reilly interview.The part of the video I found humorous was when Macfarlane made a comment on President Bush's intelligence, meanwhile they showed video of Bush being not so intellegent (which was just plain funny).
Well...Enjoy.
Chris
P.S. I'm not sure if am 100% correct with this blog. So if you have notice any inaccuracies or have any complaints, please send a comment.
###
After discovering Kieth Olbermann I decided to search for more of him. And so I did. In my search I discovered that people don't like Olbermann very much, I also found out that his show may be cancelled (maybe thats why I never heard of the show before:because apparently it sucks).
But... I came upon this video, and I became mesmerized by it. I sat through all Ten minutes of it with my jaw open clinging to every word that came out of his mouth. The reason: he was talking about George.W.Bush. Don't even bother thinking he was praising Bush for what he's done, but rather the opposite, he ripped apart every little aspect of the beloved President. Not only did he rip apart Bush, but he spoke his opinion about Clinton, 9-1-1, Monica Luinski, Osoma Binladen, the Iraq war, and so on. Whether what he said is true, reliable or overexagerated is another question, but it fascinated me none the less. Watch if you're interested:
The days are numbered; the finish line is near. It's upon the final days of this assignment, and honestly I've found myself doing things I swore I'd never do. I'm one who never downloads music, never starts silly web pages on my-space (or whatever the flavor of the year is), I'm one who has never written a blog...EVER, and I've promised to never post a picture for the world to see. Now, here I am doing just that (except for the downloading music, I still haven't done that yet). Frankly, I don't mind it.
I'm not completely sure if I'll continue this Web 2.0 "stuff" but if I were to, it would be Vox. I've actually enjoyed working with Vox. Mind you if this weren't an assignment I'd be going nowhere with this, I'd have no-one in my neighborhood, and these blogs would have no meaning what so ever. Actually I'm sure no-one even reads these as is, or at least they don't personally aknowledge it or send comments, but although it seems so pointless I might just continue on. I may not have people commenting on every little thing I do, or I may not have a neighborhood the size of texas, but it may be worth continueing in order to improve on myself, my writting, and keep in touch with the technological world.
That's my views on Vox. As for Flickr, and Del.icio.us, it's the complete opposite. It's not that those site are useless, because I'm sure (infact I know) that people find them quite useful (cough: Wayne) but for me they are the worst things that I've ever witnessed sinse High School Musical. I can not see any future use of either of those sites. I honestly see no point in them what so ever. Flickr: I don't understand the fascination with displaying pictures for the world to see. Del.icio.us: Why do you need to go to a website to find a list of websites that you can go to? Instead of wasting your time trying to type in "Del dot Icio dot Us" why can't you just type in the name of the site you really want to go to? I'm sure in the distant future I'll find a use for such sites, but for now, in my eyes, they are utterly useless.
I have nothing more to say on that topic...( tee hee High School Musical, what a terrible movie)
On to "better" things... If you are an avid reader of my blogs (HA) you would recall in my last blog I stated that I had to do sports for radio--which did indeed have to be read live. Well... I didn't do it, instead sports fanatic Deven Hiscock (whom just so happens to be in The Satellite this week--in the sports section of course [Go check it out]) took over that posotion, and I ended up doing streeters with Haley. Which I enjoyed thorrowly, unforunately I recieved the feeling that Darryl wasn't to pleased with our work. But watcha gonna do. I'm greatful I didn't have to read sports live on air: I dislike sports, and I didn't want my first radio experience to be live.
Well, this is officailly my longest blog, and thankfully I have run out of things to say. So, I shall finish it here.
Good night, and good luck.
Chris
