FINAL Literacy and the Reading Improvement Center
The Chaos Scenario Discussion
The Chaos Scenariois a narrative of upheaval, particularly the upheaval of the relationship between the consumer and the media juggernaut, be it television or advertising. It describes the changing attitudes of the contemporary audience: its members like getting their content on the Internet as opposed to the platform in which it premiered, and they like to interact with that content. They don’t like to be preached to by advertisers, and they stop at nothing to dodge advertisements. It also describes the changing attitudes of the contemporary media outlet: the media must work harder to reach its consumers, and it must endeavor to form a more intimate relationship than we’ve seen in the past.
Perhaps what I enjoyed most aboutThe Chaos Scenariowas parsing it in the context of my own industry. Publishing is experience a transitional crisis similar to what Garfield describes in television and advertising; as self-publishing technology renders some of the industry’s services useless, big-name publishers are scrambling to forge relationships with consumers via increased advertising (such as book trailers), but consumers are plugging their ears to such advertisements now more than ever before. Even more problematic than the industry’s relationship with the consumer is the industry’s relationship with the writer; jaded after being kept from chain bookstore shelves and consistently rejected by the Big Six, no-name authors are turning to Amazon in droves. It seems almost as though the tables have turned; whereas writers once begged publishers to accept their work, publishers are now begging big-name self-published writers to return to traditional publishing. It’s a thrilling time to be in publishing; I can only hope that these seismic shifts will last long enough for me to witness them when I get my foot in the door.
I enjoyed Garfield’s discussion of the necessity of cultivating relationships between individuals and media outlets; however, as enjoyable and insightful as his discussion was, I found it irreparably cheapened by his stylistic choices. Humor writing is something very delicate and precarious; those who are unable to successfully cultivate a humorous voice should avoid the genre and the tone altogether. When it’s good, it’s good, but when it’s bad, it’s really bad. Not only was Garfield’s work riddled with punctuation errors and spelling mistakes, but he maintained a painfully unfunny and irreverent tone throughout the course of the book, one which I felt detracted from the persuasiveness of his argument. To me, it was symptomatic of what Neil Postman described in Amusing Ourselves to Death; Garfield diluted a serious topic in attempting to turn it into entertainment.
New York Times: Week Twelve
Throughout the course of this week’s issues ofThe New York Times,I most enjoyed Mike Hale’s front-page article in the Wednesday issue regarding YouTube’s recent attempts to compete with television by virtue of introducing original content in the form of channels with original programming unique to YouTube. I found this article to be evident of what Bob Garfield described inThe Chaos Scenario— the economic model for television is changing in that YouTube’s new scheme is merely one of many threats to television’s longevity and profit dominance. I’m interested to see how YouTube’s scheme will develop, in that the programming featured on the YouTube channels is not designed for television— it’s designed for the Internet.
This article analyzed the development insightfully, and it was backed by an abundance of research; however, I’m skeptical as to whether it’s truly unique to theTimes.I think that lesser print publications would have reported the same news in that it’s incredibly newsworthy; that much being said, their assessment of the development would likely be less insightful and less painstakingly researched. However, an Internet publication attuned specifically to technology and media culture such asWiredmight have gotten wind of this first, and in thatWiredis a specialty publication whose reporters all have expertise in technology and media culture, it might have analyzed this new phenomenon more thoroughly. TheTimeshas wonderful reporters, but no matter how skilled, the general reporter cannot compete with a niche reporter in covering a niche topic.
New York Times: Week Eleven
Throughout the course of this week’s issues of The New York Times, I most enjoyed Gina Kolata’s front-page news article in the Wednesday issue regarding so-called “food deserts.” I was fascinated by this article in that, while I was familiar with the fact that certain areas are deprived of healthy dietary options because of the fact that their socioeconomic status precludes their affordability, I was unaware that this phenomenon has a name. Perhaps the issue also rang true with me by virtue of the fact that, while the dietary situation at DePauw is by no means as desolate as the situations of the communities profiled in the article, the healthy options at DePauw are certainly limited at best.
As to whether this article is unique to the Times, I’m highly doubtful. In class, Professor Tatge has often discussed the necessity of specializing in niche journalism in order to get ahead in the journalistic world— everyone needs to have a beat to distinguish themselves from the crowd. What Internet journalism has going for it is its ability to surpass print journalism in in niche journalism— the Times can indeed report on food deserts, but it can only give them front page treatment; it can’t devote as many of its resources to food deserts as a web publication with a section about healthy living and a slew of reporters assigned to cover solely healthy living. Because the Times covers such a broad array of topics, it can’t specialize in the way that web journalism can. Although I very much enjoyed this article, I’m certain that I could have found deeper reporting in a web publication with a healthy living beat.
Expectations Post Week Eleven
In my original expectations post, I outlined my desire to become a more knowledgeable participant in the media by virtue of becoming better-rounded in multimedia technology. Although I hesitate to say that I’ve learned any tangible multimedia skills throughout the course of this week’s classes, I feel as though I’ve learned a lot about the role of converging media and the necessity of multimedia skills in the professional lives of our panelists, which will better prepare me for my own professional life. It seemed as though Ms. Irvin’s job at Ellen forced her to be resourceful in both multimedia and problem-solving on a daily basis; it reaffirmed my desire to become better-rounded in multimedia, because it seems as though media professionals are expected to juggle an increasing amount of tasks. Additionally, while I had no expectation of learning about social media this semester, I enjoy the fact that it has become a recurring theme. As with Ms. Irvin being forced to juggle more than the media professional of ten years ago, it was interesting to me that Mr. Coffin is expected to deal with social media as a PR professional at DePauw. It seems as though, wherever media professionals go, social media and multimedia follow them. A diverse knowledge of multiple social media outlets will not only enhance my knowledge of multimedia, but will enhance my resume in that social media knowledge has become an increasingly marketable skill.
New York Times: Week Ten
Throughout the course of this week’s issues ofThe New York Times,I was particularly intrigued by Katherine Q. Seelye and Jim Rutenberg’s article in the Friday issue regarding Rick Santorum’s unexpected departure from the presidential race. I’m enthused by this development in that Santorum’s departure will centralize political attention upon Romney and therefore expose just what a straw man Romney is. Despite the fact that Romney seems to be the guaranteed Republican nominee (does anyone favor Gingrich anymore?), it seems to me that Obama will have no trouble winning the election. As delighted as I am by Santorum’s departure, I wish that it could have been under better circumstances— much as I disagree with Santorum’s ideology, I would wish a terminally ill child upon no one.
What intrigued me so much about this article was the fact that, although theTimespublished this breaking news at more or less the same time as other publications, they somehow managed to have access to such high-profile sources as distinguished political strategists and one of Romney’s campaign advisors. Although I could have read any other publication, web-based or print-based, and gathered much the same information as I gathered from this article, the depth of reporting in theTimesis inimitable because of the paper’s vast connections. This, to me, is what sets the paper apart from all other publications; theTimesis able not only to be timely with breaking news, but to profile the breaking news in greater depth than any other publication.
PR and Advertising Panel Discussion
I enjoyed the public relations and advertising panel discussion that occurred on Friday; I felt that the panelists’ discussions of common misperceptions of public relations and of their career paths were by far the most interesting elements of the panel. It’s fascinating to me that, of the three members of public relations on the panel, only one intended to go into the field— the other two seemed to have meandered their way into public relations after a string of varied jobs. It’s also fascinating that Mr. MacGregor and Ms. Protogere both claimed to be somewhat disillusioned and dissatisfied by journalism before they turned to public relations. Their dissatisfaction is compelling when parsed in comparison with the fact that many journalists consider public relations to be “the dark side”— perhaps they consider it so because it can be a harbinger of disillusionment and departure from their industry? People whose careers span so many varying jobs are always fascinating to me— they make me wonder if I’m perhaps too fastidious in being set on the singular, tiny industry of publishing.
I also enjoyed the discussion of how journalists (mis)perceive public relations. There seems to be a pervasive philosophy among journalists that members of public relations are unethical, draconian spin doctors who promote vicious lies in order to save the images of corporate bigwhigs. I think that society (and journalists in particular) get so transfixed by the crisis management side of public relations that we forget about the other side— it seems to me that members of public relations spend far more time promoting a positive image and building a brand for their clients than they do covering up scandal. It was refreshing to hear about the day-to-day lives of members of public relations as opposed to what we so often hear about— those who cover up the wrongdoings of the Lindsay Lohans and Tiger Woodses of the world.
