The power of public broadcasting abroad- blog by Jeff Cohen

Link to blog: http://indyf16.blogspot.com/2016/11/why-cant-we-have-public-broadcasting.html

A video we watched in class, showed an interview done by the BBC in which everyday British citizens, skeptical and highly critical of Prime Minister Tony Blair's reasoning in supporting the US invasion of Iraq, in search of non existent weapons of mass destruction.

The citizens are able to question and criticize the Prime Minister to his face asking him how he feels it is legally and morally acceptable to do what led to the 2003 invasion. Such cross examination and public criticism of the Prime Minister by citizens on national television is something simply unheard of in America.

I was amazed to see students in my class question how this was possible when I believe the very embodiment of government is to be scrutinized, analyzed, and discussed by citizens who are responsible for the government to be in power in the first place. Such interviews are common on Indian television as well, on commercial networks such as NDTV and Times Now.

When, if ever, such an interview was conducted in America with the President made to face the question of the public, that may not always agree with his/her views will be the time when independent media outlets such as Democracy Now! will be able to get conservative government officials to answer on television for their wrong doings and failed political actions. 

Is U.S media system failing to inform?- blog by Jeff Cohen

Link to blog: http://indyf16.blogspot.com/2016/11/is-us-media-system-failing-to-inform.html

"Common sense is very uncommon" is a quote many people may have heard before. Considering the results of the recently concluded elections, this seems rather true.

Public knowledge about current events in America is found at much lower levels than other countries across the world.

A 2008 study linked here from the blog above showed that countries having strong and free TV/Radio dominated by public broadcasting had the most well informed public.

A corporate and commercial media in America, leads to polls showing very low numbers of informed public, when it comes to public knowledge regarding hot topics in the country.

Only when public broadcasting and independent media are able to reach the majority of the country through national television and radio, will unbiased opinion free from commercial and corporate networks, thrive to help increase the number of people versed in public knowledge and common sense. 

Net neutrality: Soon to be a past dream?

Link to article: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/gonzalez-fcc-flip-flop-net-loss-article-1.1768404

The FCC could potentially make the Internet a playground for the rich and corporate, leaving the common man stuck in the middle, or the bottom.

A proposal announced by the FCC, could cause huge damage to how the Internet is used and available to people.

Former FCC Commissioner Michael Copps warns, "This portends a future where the 1% get to drive on the fast lane and the 99% are left in the slow lane."

Under the Trump presidency, it is scary to think that such a proposal may indeed be passed in the near future.

I believe this would only increase the monopoly already shared by major telecommunications networks and companies, through which multi-billion dollar companies will be able to have faster internet speeds for their internet content, leaving the vast majority of the internet without equal connection. 

American Internet: Why is it so slow?

Link to article: http://theweek.com/articles/449919/why-american-internet-slow

I was actually not surprised by this during class as much as students around me seemed to be. It is easy to imagine that the country that invented the Internet, which also happens to be home to almost every major technology and communications company in the world; would be number 1 in terms of download speeds and reliability.

In India, we study and see how various telecommunication companies and mobile service providers fight each other through court battles and advertisements attacking one another to try and get more customers. They constantly provide better deals and lower rates to gain more revenue. This increases their investment in making their brand, and the internet better for the people.

In America, as explained in the article; a monopoly between "huge telecommunication companies have divided up the market and put themselves in a position where they're subject to no competition."

From my understanding of the article, it is only when there is strong competition in the market will telecommunication companies have the desire, or rather desperate need, to invest in better internet infrastructure in the country.

With TimeWarner cable and Verizon seeming to sweep away all competition in the country, it is unlikely that America will rise up in the charts of internet download speed rankings anytime soon. 

Entrepreneurial lessons by Jeff Jarvis

Link to blog: http://buzzmachine.com/2007/12/10/entrepreneurial-lessons/

The tips of how to pitch and form an entrepreneurial idea as a journalist was very helpful when coming up with a pitch for our final project in the class.

I found the 17 word theory very interesting. I always felt the more you say and the more clear you are, regardless of a word count is the best way to pitch an idea, but I learned that it is not the quantity of words necessary, just the quality of what is said.

In the ever growing business and corporate world we see today, journalism will have to evolve into a business model, and a profitable one, if it is to survive in the 21st century and beyond.

Jeff Jarvis, who wrote the blog, stressed the need to market oneself and how advertising your brand or business is key. This helped me think of ways in which I can use advertisements not only for revenue, but as a means of showcasing my idea as well. 

Bill Clinton: Purdum a "Sleazy", "Slimy", "Scumbag"

Link to article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/bill-clinton-purdhum-a-sl_b_104771.html

The article explains how Bill Clinton made scathing remarks to describe Todd Purdum; who was a writer at Vanity Fair, where Clinton describes him as "Sleazy", "Slimy", and "Scumbag".

Purdum's piece for Vanity Fair criticized former President Clinton for, "bringing negative attention to Hillary Clinton’s candidacy and for surrounding himself with friends who might discredit her campaign" as quoted in the article. 

I think Bill Clinton had no need to say such remarks about Purdum, even though Purdum criticizes Clinton in his article. 

While the statements used by Clinton are debatable as to whether they are justified or not, he goes on to say that Purdum cannot be trusted and that his work is false by stating, "“Anytime you read a story that slimes a public figure with anonymous quotes, it oughta make the bells go off in your head. Because anytime somebody uses those things— he wrote the story in his head in advance, and he just goes around and tries to find some coward to say whatever they want to say, hoping to get some benefit out of it. It didn’t bother me. It shouldn’t bother you.”

It is obviously evident that the article by Purdum has bothered Clinton very much, further creating a negative perception of himself. 

Citizen Journalism: Mayhill Fowler

Link to article: http://articles.latimes.com/print/2008/apr/15/nation/na-bitter15

The article explains how a citizen journalist named Mayhill Fowler; writing for the Huffington Post at the time, wrote an article about Barack Obama in which he makes a comment on Midwesterners and how they are dissatisfied by the government's work.

Obama's quote is as follows, "And it's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." as part of a lengthy response. 

The story was used by right wing media and supporters to denounce Obama by calling him elitist and and condescending towards middle class Westerners and small town people. The article explains how this report brought a lot of backlash towards Obama and towards citizen journalists such as Mayhill Fowler. 

A big question that can be asked is, whether something said in a 'closed press' event, that Fowler managed to attend with help from an Obama official she knew by asking for an invitation, should be considered information that can be used by her even though she is not a journalist. 

In similar terms, the audio clip that surfaced recently in which Trump can be heard saying very disgraceful and sexist remarks against women was also made in a private location. I believe that anything said by a celebrity or politician (especially during election period) can and should be used to inform the public because a candidate such as Trump may present himself as something publicly and be different when seen or heard behind closed doors. 

Such information must be made public so that voters can have a better understanding of the candidate they hope to vote for and elect.