WDRB Critique 5

WDRB Media Critique #4

Overall as a news source, I think WDRB is not a good one. It often fills much of its front page with fluff and almost never includes interesting investigative reporting. In my past few critiques I’ve linked a few articles which were horrible examples of good journalism ( or rather amazing examples of bad journalism..) WDRB is also very biased towards conservative views. There is nothing wrong with being a conservative. However, when your political views affect how you write your stories and what you include in them, it breaks a huge journalistic rule (remaining unbiased). For these reasons I think WDRB is not a good source to get news from

WDRB Media Critique #3

This story is the worst case of fluff I have ever seen. I was scrolling through WDRB’s website and I found this story http://www.wdrb.com/story/39408734/brady-bunch-cast-reunites-at-tv-home-before-reality-show-renovation.
The first thing that caught my eye with this story is that it was about a reality TV show. On a major news source like WDRB this doesn’t belong high on the first page. This is “news” more fit for a gas station tabloid. There are also no sources included in this article except for paraphrased quotes from cast members and a few tweet screenshots. That’s why overall this is a horrendous news story.

WDRB Critique #2

Media Critique #2

http://www.wdrb.com/story/39409210/judge-rules-crystal-rogers-son-can-no-longer-see-his-grandmother-sherry-ballard

In this article it explains that a three-judge panel of the Kentucky Court of Appeals ruled Friday that the 6-year-old son of Crystal Rogers, the Bardstown woman who disappeared in July 2015 and is assumed dead, is no longer allowed to visit his grandmother, Sherry Ballard.

I do not consider this as newsworthy at all! This only affects one small family in Kentucky. It was the third post down on the website and does not need that attention when many other stories could be in its place. WDRB has continuously had an issue with newsworthiness and I think it needs to be addressed.

News Critique #1 WDRB

The news story I’m going to be critiquing is http://www.wdrb.com/story/39383882/gum-bottled-water-pizza-bagels-want-to-be-called-healthy on WDRB.
This is not a newsworthy story to be on the front page of the website. It’s nothing that the people of Louisville need to know and it’s simply fluff. This could’ve been replaced by another news story.

However, I will say that the reporter did a good gob of including sources and numbers. There are good facts included in the article but overall it is not a great story to be an the front page of WDRB and more appropriate on a human interest website such as Buzzfeed and such.

Mass Communication

We had a very lively class discussion about mass communication. I feel like I learned a lot during it. An interesting way I learned to tell if something is mass communication or not is that with mass communication there is no immediate feedback. I has also never thought in depth about the steps in communication. I think that having that knowledge will help me communicate in the future.

Class Discussion on The Elements & Yardsticks

One of the first class discussions we had was about The Elements and Yardsticks of Journalism. Before we talked about this, I had NO idea there could be so many rules about journalism. I had watched news and read articles with no regard for the quality of the news and more just what the event was. Now I can’t even look at a news article on my phone without going through some of the Yardsticks in my head to test the journalist on. I think one of the most important elements is “Make the important interesting.” If journalists need to inform the public about some new very important information, the should make it interesting so that readers will be engaged and happy to read about it. This will mean more people will read the article, and therefore more of the public will stay educated about the discovery.

Analyzation of Anna Schroll Blog J1

annaj1blog.blogspot.com
In Anna's blog post about the Yardsticks/ Elements of she brought up some very good points. She explains how before learning about these 'rules' of journalism that she watched news without looking at it for quality. I am guilty of this too and now I realize how important GOOD journalism is. I think that these rules will help me write in the future and are in general good for anyone spreading information to follow. I do have a criticism though, when she says  "When reporting on a story, all sides should be included and given an equal say in the issue at hand." There are a large amount of stories where this does not apply. For example, if you are doing a story on a terrorist group caught by police, you do not need a quote from the terrorist group.

Analyzation of Sam Watkins Blog J1

http://samshottakes.blogspot.com/

I thought this blog post was very well worded. The intro was very catchy and led me in to the post like it was a professional writer. I liked his use of complex words and writing techniques. I agree with what Sam said 

"I found this to be really interesting because there’s now, there’s so much fighting between different partisan news networks… but even so, this standard still really isn’t met." I think this is very true and I think this standard should get more attention from journalists. 

Media Critique J1

I chose to do my media critique on journalist Artemis Moshtaghian based on her story for CNN linked here https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/11/us/wanda-barzee-elizabeth-smart-kidnapping/index.html.
The major problem with this article is that it is not newsworthy. According to the first yardstick of journalism, the topic should have a lasting effect on a large group of people. This article is simply talking about a kidnapping in small-town Utah. Unless you personally knew any of the people involved or live in the town, you will probably forget about the article in a week or maybe within the day. Now, if this article was about a string of kidnapping around the country, or other nationwide matters then there would be no problem and it would be newsworthy. However, it is only effecting a few people in Utah therefore it is not an article suitable for CNN’s website and would be better placed in the local newspaper in Utah.

This article also violates the second AND third yardsticks of journalism. The journalist completely ignores the purpose of the third yardstick which is ‘not what, SO what”. The journalist writes that this criminal woman is going to be released from prison, but she does not explain why this matters to the people. Moshtaghian also includes NO sources whatsoever for her article which clearly violates the second yardstick of journalism. In conclusion, Moshtaghian should have cited her sources and explained to the readers why we should care about this article.