Social Media A Growing Player In Elections

Although social media has been important for quite some time now regarding elections, it is ready to truly take flight in 2012. A study conducted by the Pew Research Center found that 20 percent of online users use social networking cites in order to share information about the 2010 midterm elections. Additionally, the Pew Study reported that 53 percent of Internet users went online to participate in campaign related activities. This participation ranges from watching YouTube clips or a candidate's Facebook page. Aaron Smith, a senior researcher for this Pew Study noted, "As more people live more of their lives in the social web, it becomes an important space for them to share their views and interpret what is going on in the world around them." As noted by another researcher, "we are just beginning to scratch the surface of what happens when you combine real-time web access with location services with tools that you can carry anywhere in your pocket." Although most of us already realized, social media is really beginning to take over. 

"Deadly Blast Strikes Outside Jerusalem's Central Bus Station"

"Deadly Blast Strikes Outside Jerusalem's Central Bus Station"

This was on the cover of NYTimes.com. Here is the link - www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/world/middleeast/24israel.html?_r=&hp

After receiving comments on my previous post "Suspecting Palestinians," I would like to clarify now. While correct that the Palestinians were technically suspects, the title shifted the focus on what actually transpired. It's true I am biased which is precisely what Sophie said on my last post. As she noted, "As Jews who feel a connection to the Fogel family, we want the news to echo all the hurt and pain that we feel." It's true. It is personal and we are biased. But, at the same time, this news selection that I just posted really does depict what occurred. The use of the words "Deadly Blast" immediately put the reader into the proper frame of mind. I believe the difference in the articles may be subtle, but there is a world of difference. Love to hear your thoughts. 

"Suspecting Palestinians, Israel Seeks Killers of 5 West Bank Settlers"

"Suspecting Palestinians, Israel Seeks Killers of 5 West Bank Settlers"

As a Jew, and one is who is quite Pro-Israel, I am not naive enough to think that I am not biased in every which way. However, this article's title, published by the New York Times, found here, www.nytimes.com/2011/03/13/world/middleeast/13mideast.html, truly bothered me. "Suspecting Palestinians," immediately softens the blow. Correct, it has not been proven that they were the killers, however, it is well more than likely. I mean the real story here is that five members of the Fogel family were stabbed to death in their sleep, a cruel and disgusting way to murder. Perhaps, I'm over thinking this one, I would love to hear your thoughts. 

Better Late Than Never?

What is the role of the media and politics? Should they be more involved in Watchdog Journalism, attempting to alert Americans about the important news? Perhaps, they are responsible for boosting the country's morale. Or, maybe they're goal should be to intimidate our enemies? These type of questions must be taken into account when media breaks a story that happened a long time ago that really plays no affect on the country's future. The Press had an incredibly interesting quote regarding this topic. "A Story Told Late Is Better Than A Story Never Told, The Latter Akin To The Proverbial A Tree That Falls In The Wilderness." Personally, I'm torn on this issue. On the one hand, the truth should come out. However, it if has no impact, if it is merely just exciting, is it worth it? 

False Stories: Big Sellers

I found Chapter 19 in The Press to be a pretty interesting and insightful chapter, particularly the way the press acted prior to WWI. Hearst and Pulitzer were determined to sell papers regardless of whether the material was true or not. After discovering that war stories sell papers, Hearst encouraged his journalists to find anything, and he'll simply construct a story. He was right. These false stories drastically increased the paper's popularity. Due to these false stories, the government came down hard on the press during WWI, basically restricting them from any access to the happenings and events during the war. Interestingly enough, false stories are still hot topics today and sell millions of papers whether in the tabloids or in magazines. As I checked out at a local supermarket, I saw magazines from US Weekly to People talking about absurd stories. Perhaps some are true, but some are certainly not. As we suggested in class, the media is a business and the bottom line matters. The question becomes, at what expense?

Huckabee Slams "Sensationalized" Coverage of Comments on Obama

Republican Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee was enraged at the New York Times for "sensationalizing" comments about President Obama's birth certificate and upbringing. Huckabee noted, "I'm not surprised the NY Times chose to sensationalize this story. In fact, the New York Times, the AP, and other news organizations ran with the "sensationalized story" despite being specifically told by [WOR radio host] Steve Malzberg himself that they were incorrect in their assessment of the sound bite. You just can't help but laugh when my simple slip of the tongue, becomes a huge story - and a certain Presidential candidate claiming to visit all 57 states, gets widely ignored." Huckabee accidentally said that Obama spent time in Kenya, when he simply meant to say Indonesia, giving Obama a different perspective. Additionally, Huckabee reconfirmed that he has no issue with Obama's birth certificate. 

In order to really show how media headlines can spin a story, I will display The Ticket's headline versus Fox News's headline.

"Huckabee Falsely Claims Obama Was Raised in Kenya"

"Huckabee Clarifies "Kenya" Remark about Obama"