Progress instead of politics

As a Community Blogger for the local newspaper, I first try to decide which direction to go. As the Dr. once said: We can't stop here. This is bat country.

As I begin my blogging project with The Anniston Star, I feel the need to first address the disconnect many in my generation feel with the general concept of news outlets. We've grown up for the past three decades having most everything prepackaged with bells, whistles, and eye-catching artwork—a technique that has proven successful for industries profiting from goods like cell phones, video games, music, and movies.



However, an industry that hasn't been able to catch our attention for more than a few days is one I personally refer to as the “news-media” industry: and international group of corporate-owned television and radio networks that commonly report news through an entertainment business model. While more often than not the companies within this industry seem to put quality journalism a close second to their bottom line, there are stand-out factions that continue to damage an otherwise respectable and necessary profession.



A recent example of the more extreme side of the news-media industry is the Fox News Sunday interview with Comedy Central's Jon Stewart. From the start of the interview, Stewart defended his description of Fox News as an “...agenda-driven, 24 hour news-opinion, propaganda delivery system.” Chris Wallace asked if Stewart thought “mainstream” news organizations like ABC, NBC, The New York Times, and others were “promoting a liberal agenda” and Stewart blamed their media bias on “sensationalism, conflict, and laziness” rather than political agendas.



In an attempt to prove a mainstream agenda, Chris Wallace showed a clip of ABC's Diane Sawyer exhibiting a “liberal bias” in her report of Arizona immigration laws. Stewart was quick to admit that her description of the new law could easily misinform viewers, but her description was not necessarily promoting the liberal slant that Wallace claimed Fox News tries to counteract. Stewart went on to give an example of the news-media's bias across an entire industry when he reminded Wallace of a news story from the previous day—when 24-hour news outlets abruptly ended live coverage of a press conference once a story was no longer a story:

“3 networks—Fox, CNN, msnbc—are going live to the Nancy Pelosi news conference because they are sure, coming on the heels of Anthony Weiner resigning, that she is going to make some sort of incredible statement about 'I am disappointed in Anthony Weiner.' So they are all locked on it, and the whole time there is hand-wringing: 'Aww, I can't believe we have got to go and do this. The American people don't care about this. They care about jobs. They care about the economy. That is what the American people care about. We are about to go live to Speaker Pelosi.' She is about to do that. She steps up to the podium and says what? 'I am not going to comment about Anthony Weiner. I am going to talk about jobs and I am going to talk about the economy,' and what did everybody do? So what is you're proof again about the partisan agenda and what I do? That is the embarrassment. The embarrassment is that I am given credibility in this world because of the disappointment that the public has for what the news-media does.” (Jon Stewart on Fox News Sunday - 19 June, 2011)

Pundits, talking heads, and average citizens dissected the interview for days. The left snapped at Fox for editing a short (yet poignant) portion of the interview during their replays—technically the unedited version is available on their website. The right paraded a remark made by Stewart that was blatantly false—his point was later reiterated and verified on The Daily Show.



Chris Wallace offered his own final opinion of the conversation when he told Don Imus "...if you were a liberal, you thought that [Stewart] just wiped the floor with me. And if you were a conservative, you thought I just wiped the floor with him." This statement perhaps speaks louder than the entire 24-minutes Stewart and Wallace shared; the very sensationalism, conflict, and laziness described by Stewart can be seen in both the producers and consumers of the news-media industry.



However, The Anniston Star's Community Blogging Project will hopefully prove to become and new way to finally blur the lines between news-media “producers” and “consumers.” A younger and more tech-savvy generation is becoming more involved in the economy and government—and in a time where television, radio, and newspapers are losing ground to the internet as the main news source for the public, the distribution of information concerning government and economic issues becomes that much more important. Instead of dwelling on the failure of mediums like cable news networks to inform 'We the People,' I'm excited to instead do my part in a network of citizens who want to see progress, not politics.

-MDS

Wildly misguided pursuits of a dream may have gotten easier

In the first months of 2011, the growing political unrest throughout the Middle East became the headlines here in the United States. The revolution in Egypt captivated many Americans while the atrocities in Libya horrified even more. As an aspiring journalist in the first few years of a college education, I tediously gathered resources from across the internet to better understand these events—among others—and to pass information along to my peers. Much of my newfound knowledge was posted to my personal blog, In the Field. For years I have always enjoyed informing portions of my highly sought-after demographic that almost completely ignores mainstream news outlets thanks to the old-journalism practices of political partisanship, capitalistic goals, and a long history of outright lies delivered to the consumers of media.


March 22 didn't change a thing. On that sleepless Tuesday night, I saw some of the first Twitter posts coming from the Syrian front of the Arab Spring:


“Urgent: Security forces are storming #Omari mosque now in #Daraa #Syria” (@Mohammad_Syria)


Research ensued for hours as I discovered that finding a number of legitimate sources to confirm these reports from protesters wasn't too difficult; finding legitimate sources defending Syrian government forces was futile; finding English news articles about the events at al-Omari was near impossible. Perhaps the most difficult aspect for me was to accept—as truth—the videos, pictures and stories that depicted heartless violence against unarmed men. Over the course of six hours I compiled all of the information I had into 400 of the most objective words I could muster. Shortly after I posted my rendition of Daraa, stories began to surface on the internet from the BBC, Associated Press, Al Jazeera, and the LA Times—all of which verified the 400 words posted to In the Field.


Then the news slowly returned to it's regularly scheduled instigation of civil war between the “left” and “right.”


Over the course of the past semester, this test of my skills as a writer seemed much more challenging and productive than college assignments of critiquing F. Scott Fitzgerald stories, producing a summary of Herbert Spencer's synthetic philosophy, or just struggling to stay awake during psychology lectures. The challenge of writing about Daraa, Syria was immediate due to language barriers, lack of confirmed reports from mainstream news outlets, and my sheer inexperience in the field. The productivity took some time to show results, but eventually did in the form of in-depth discussions with local people who were first informed of Syrian dissent from In the Field blogs—people with curiosity about the world but contempt for the media.


Further premature and mistake riddled attempts at becoming a working journalist have quickly taken a backseat to pesky things like yard work and a day job, but the fascination with mass media along with a naive curiosity of current events continues to drive the desire to get the hell out of school. After losing sight of the forest for the trees, I was beyond elated to see an article by Bob Davis in the June 19th edition of The Anniston Star. Davis, editor for The Star, announced “an effort we hope will harness this desire to share community news in the digital age. We are introducing a Community Bloggers project.”


I think this summer just got a little more interesting.


-MDS

Calming the Facebook/DIRECTV rumors

3 June 2011 - Rumors have started floating around social networking sites like Facebook claiming DIRECTV customers who suffered damage from the 2011 tornadoes are "...being told to send in a box or remote control or pay a fine of $500+ to cancel service." 

Jade L. Eksdedt, Senior Manager of Public Relations for DirecTV, expressed sympathy to those who suffered losses as a result of the storms and assured that DIRECTV is "...currently working with customers affected by the tragedy to determine a solution that best fits their needs."

In a statement sent to In The Field, Eksdedt said "if service cannot be restored at the customer’s home due to the damage from the storm, DIRECTV will cancel the account and waive any fees associated with the inability to return equipment, along with any remaining agreement on the account."

Eksdedt went on to say that customers without electricity for an extended period of time have the option to temporarily suspend accounts until proper services have been restored. DIRECTV is also offering "no-cost service calls" to properly fix any technical issues resulting from the storms.

For customers that suffered damage but did wish to retain their service, Eksdedt said DIRECTV will "...offer to waive equipment replacement costs if they continue services."

Eksdedt concluded the statement by saying "customers who have been affected by the tornado should call 1-800-531-5000 so we [DIRECTV] can remedy their situation immediately."

-MDS