Why journalism remains a good major, as argued by a department chair and a third-generation journo:<\/p>\n
If anything, (Chico State’s Susan Brockus Wiesinger) says, the skills the journalism program teaches\u2014multiplatform writing and storytelling chief among them\u2014are more in demand than ever before, and job opportunities abound.<\/p>\n
Yes, she tells students, corporate daily newspapers are suffering mass layoffs, but the nation\u2019s thousands of community newspapers are doing well, as are magazines. And the need for clearly and cleanly written content in other arenas\u2014on the web, in business, on cable or broadcast television, in the public-relations field, and in many other areas\u2014is growing rapidly.<\/p>\n
When students ask her where they can find jobs, she has a one-word reply: \u201cEverywhere.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
There are some generalities in those anecdotes, but I’d agree with the overall sentiment. I also appreciate this part of her argument:<\/p>\n
When Wiesinger talks to incoming freshmen journalism students, she likes to ask them bluntly: \u201cWhy are you here?\u201d She wants to learn whether they have passion for the profession\u2014because of its importance to democracy, because of the teamwork required to practice it well, because reporting and writing vivid, meaningful stories is fun and exciting and never boring.<\/p>\n
And she wants to encourage them, to make sure they know that by majoring in journalism they are going to learn skills that are invaluable in almost any profession and that will make them attractive to recruiters.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Chico State is a writing program, because they fear sending unprepared multimedia types out into the world. That’s the case with several of the more traditional programs. There’s no reason a department can’t prepare students with both the soft and the hard skills, and maybe even send them to computer science for a minor that will arm them for the future. That was the basis of a panel discussion we recently held at AEJMC.<\/p>\n
But I digress.<\/p>\n
Non-breaking<\/strong> non-news from Poynter<\/a>, who reports that Cleveland.com (Disclosure: I once worked for a sister site) is accepting anonymous comments with open arms. (They’ve been doing this for a long time.) But the perspective is worth repeating as more and more newsrooms grow weary of dealing with the vitriole that can hide in anonymity. <\/p>\n
\u201cI think you miss out on the full extent of the [online] medium if you block out what readers have to say,\u201d Cleveland.com Editor In Chief Denise Polverine told NetNewsCheck. \u201cSome news organizations feel their voice is the final voice on a subject, and that\u2019s not the case at Cleveland.com.\u201d That\u2019s not to say the comments are untouched. Moderators remove offensive ones, and on sensitive stories comments may be disabled entirely. A community manager writes a note about commenters when they attain \u201cfeatured user\u201d status and quotes something they\u2019ve posted recently.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Does an<\/strong> “extraordinary situation” permit you to use someone else’s work without permission? The BBC seems to think so<\/a>:<\/p>\n
Social media editor Chris Hamilton clarifies that the organization\u2019s policy is to \u201cmake every effort to contact people who\u2019ve taken photos we want to use in our coverage and ask for their permission before doing so.\u201d However, Hamilton noted, \u201cwhere there is a strong public interest and often time constraints,\u201d a senior editor may decide to \u201cuse a photo before we\u2019ve cleared it.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
I’m sure the BBC bristles when this happens in the other direction, however. That’s essentially the argument that people like Jeff Jarvis<\/a>, Jay Rosen<\/a> and others take about the news, that the paper (or other outlet) doesn’t “own” content, and that when it is out there, it is out there. Information, public domain and all of that. <\/p>\n
And now that the shoe is on the other foot — even the BBC can’t be everywhere, so there’s the pro-am journalist solution — it will be interesting to see how this is accepted over time. <\/p>\n
We’ve all had<\/strong> this kind of interview:<\/p>\n