Pulled Quotes

It is a war of the tabloids when it comes to celebrities and the photos of their newborns. Surprisingly, we, as a society, seem to care more about Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s baby pictures than we care about the actual events that are taking place in the world around us. USA Today featured an interesting article “Let’s make a baby-picture deal” in today (Thursday) Febuary 28. The article featured a story on the proud new parents of twins, Marc Anthony and Jennifer Lopez. The story commented on the “talk” of the expected money sums, which have been crowding the tabloid offices with who will be the first to feature the newcomers of Hollywood; People magazine takes the prize.

Baby photos are something that grabs a readers attention, according to the managing editor of People magazine. The magazine itself loves to be the first to have these photos and America loves reading the articles and viewing the photos. But why? Why do we love so much to read about celebrities having babies, and why do we care to see the first images after they are born? Some people don’t even have pictures of their own children, yet celebrities children are apparently much more fascinating. While reading this article, I was dumbfounded by how many people will be the first to pick up the new issue for the pictures of the newborns. Have we turned into a culture that lives vicariously through celebrities, as their lives are more drastic than our own?

USA Today chose to use examples, from People, in regards to formerly new parents and their children; Lisa Marie Presley’s issue had over 1.9 million sales, Patrick Dempsey had over 1.6 million, Christina Aguilera’s reports were not yet figured, and finally, taking the lead was Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt with approximately 2.2 million sales for the shots of their new bundle of joy, Shiloh Jolie-Pitt, according to the USA Today article. These numbers seem overwhelming, and still I wonder why we care? Of course they are cute, but we don’t know them, and never will, so why must we oodle over these babies we don’t know?

I was reading the USA Today yesterday and found an article entitled “Teens losing touch with historical references.”  Greg Toppo began this article with a lead that is, to say the least, not very fact-laden:  “Big Brother.  McCarthyism.  The patience of Job.”  He explains further on that these are references that are going unrecognized more and more as today’s teens find other interests besides their parents’ pop culture, but it takes a little reading before he actually gets to the meat of his article. 

 Apparently, a recent study of 1,200 high schoolers indicates that overall, they were capable of earning a C in history and an F in literature, according to the article.  There were some areas where students learned more than others- specifically, civil-rights-era American history took precedence over classic literature, perhaps a side effect of encouraging (or more accurately, requiring) teachers to focus on math and reading skills during classroom time that used to be reserved for liberal arts education.

 He obviously didn’t follow the inverted pyramid style, but for this article, I think that’s ok.  He mentions a few statistics that contextualize what teens are and aren’t learning around the middle of the article, and uses pretty hefty quotes from people like Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute and Chester Finn of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, yet only a one-line quote is credited to Trevor Packer of The College Board.  This article could have been better-rounded if he included quotes from students, perhaps, such as those who don’t know Winston Smith from Joseph McCarthy.

Oh, (big) brother.  If teens don’t even know 1984 these days, maybe we were better off with you watching us…

Today I want to discuss the radically different ways that a story can be presented, using the New York Philharmonic playing in North Korea as an example. I’ve found two different articles, one in the Financial Times and one from Yahoo News that treat the story completely differently.

The Financial Times article has the headline “Ovation in Pyongyang is music to US ears.” It leads with the North Korean audience’s standing ovation for the US musicians and talks about the performance as generating “rapturous applause.” It has a lot of really interesting quotes from North Koreans (which I wonder how they got, since North Korea is notoriously restrective of the press), and by the end makes it seem like democracy and prosperity and general fun are about to break out in North Korea because of the New York Philharmonic.

The Yahoo News story, though, paints a different picture, under the headline “New York Phil gets muted reaction.” It mentions the standing ovation in the second paragraph, but focuses significantly more on how the concert wasn’t well received by the North Korean media. It doesn’t have any quotes from actual North Koreans, but has a bit from state-controlled newspapers.

I’m not really sure whether the performance was met with “rapturous applause” or golf claps, or why these stories are so different, but I have a few ideas. For one, FT is a British paper, which from what I understand, doesn’t try very hard to hide its liberal positions; Yahoo is essentially a wire source, which strives for neutrality. It’s probably to FT’s political advantage to report that North Korea is on the verge of breaking out into democracy, though I’m still damn impressed that they got those quotes from real North Koreans.

Another cause for this disparity could be the sources. Yahoo is looking at the state papers, while FT is talking to the people, which in a totalitarian state, probably say very different things.

In the USA Today article Thousands seek tix to see pope in USA, the writer talks about the fact that in both N.Y and D.C, the venues selected to house the pope’s visit have been “sold out.” The article in effective in that it gives us most of the information around the pope’s visit. There are a few questions left unanswered such: as are these the only cities that he will be visiting? When will there be another visit? 

The lede also begins with the two archdioceses. While this is clearly important, I believe that I would start the article with the number of ticket requests rather than the two archdioceses. Another important fact is that of the venues: Yankee Stadium and Nationals Park. I would most likely begin with the number of requests and the places that were filled to the brim. 

Another interesting fact that wasn’t as stressed as I believe it could have been is that the archdiocese of Baltimore’s website was shut down due to all of the traffic; that just seems pretty unusual/unexpected to me.

An article on the USA Today website caught my attention. Apparently there’s a new school in California, Oaksterdam University, that prepares its students for the medicinal marijuana industry. The school is located in Oakland, where some of the first practices with medicinal marijuana began. If you’re wondering where the name of the new school comes from, combine the names Oakland and Amsterdam (the city in Holland infamous for pot) and there you have it.

What works in this article is the obvious wit,  but this isn’t a magazine, it is a newspaper. The first few lines of the article act more as a tease than any kind of informative intro. By the third paragraph, I am finally understanding what is going on here. Do not be surprised to find out that the students who enroll into the program (which is a 2 day course on the weekends, full until May) are either in it out of curiousity, or to gain tips on how to ehance their own experiences with pot.

The article brings up some necessary points and facts though. Yet again, we’re hearing about California, a state that is typically finding its way into the controversial spotlight that surrounds the legalization of marijuana. We’re also finding out that, yet again, some students may be abusing the courses this school is offering for their own personal lifestyle. In turn, this has outraged some people in the community, making marijuana, once again, the ongoing controvery it is.

With that said, so what? I’m not even sure how seriously I’m supposed to take this article when its opening lines are vague and mysteriously intriguing, yet close with a man from the DEA talking about the grave seriousness of the matter. What is someone supposed to take from this?

The article I read on msnbc.com, “Trial of 3 NYC police officers begins,” is a typical news story that describes the scene of the crime, talks about who was charged with what, and lays out the facts. Sean Bell, 23, was at a bachelor party the night before his wedding and was killed by police gunshots outside a strip club in Queens. Bell was, supposedly, drunk and dangerous.

This article is newsworthy because when police make wrong, deadly decisions, that impacts the rest of us that are at risk. The story is timely because it happened today, and it also has a certain degree of proximity because it happened in the United States.

After learning more about how to construct a news story, using the appropriate type of lead and moving from more general information to more specific information, I feel that I can effectively critique this article. I thought the lead should have been a “what lead,” since a man being shot on his wedding day is the most interesting piece of information, at least in my opinion. However, the Associated Press started off the story with a “who lead,” using the three police detectives as the subjects. They focused the story more on the police than on the dead man, but as the story progressed and got more specific, they included information about the man’s devastated bride-to-be. I guess this story was a good guide for the news story I’m working on.

The Daytona Beach News Journal, www.news-journalonline.com, captured readers in its article about the Oscars and the staring candidate: “No Country for Old Men.” The article features the big celebs and their debutes as the Oscars take over Los Angeles. I enjoyed how the article presented the winners again, in case anyone forgot, but I also liked how they incorporated the memorable quotes of those who won. For example, Tilda Swinton, best supporting actress from “Michael Clayton,” gave a memorable speech about how she would not be here if it was not for her agent. While watching the Oscars last night, it was emotional to know how passionate she is about acting and how thankful she is for her career. To include quotes from those special talents brings a close to home feel and spoke to me as a reader. The article continues to include excerpts from the Coen brothers as well as Spanish actor Javier Bardem.

The article incorporated the facts of the whole night and gave readers an opportunity to relive the event. The various films and actors that represented the best were listed and a list of those that were nominated were included as well. As I was enjoying the Oscars last night, I remember thinking they did not do much of a tribute to Heath Ledger. To me, the papers seem to constantly have articles in regards to the actor’s death; therefore, I found it odd that they did not dedicate more of the event to him with a small clip of his work and life. That was more of a side note; nonetheless, the article made me feel as though I was watching it all over again. It was a fun read.

In Thursday, February 21, 2008 USA Today, there was an article on page 5C written by the wire reports called “A-Rod expects scrutiny.” I thought that this article was really interesting because it focused on how Yankee baseball player Alex Rodriquez is encountering scrutiny about taking drugs during a time where he approcahes Barry Bond’s career home run record and during a time where it has been discovered that many atheletes are taking performance-enhancing drugs. I thought that this article was very newsworthy especially because it definitely is a news article that changes the status quo and is prominent because of who Alex Rodriquez is and the timeliness of the issue.

I really liked how the writer of this article gave us background information about baseball’s drug testing rules. I think that it shows that the writers did their research and provided readers with the background information necessary to understand the scrutiny that a player like Alex Rodriquez is getting. I also think that the sources used in this article was great. I feel like some writers will write an article about a specific person without having any quotes from that person about that issue, and the story loses both credibility and newsworthiness. However, the sources used in this article come from Alex Rodriquez and those who are prevalant to baseball, the baseball team Alex Rodriquez is part of and those who know about this issue at hand. I also thought that giving readers a glimpse into the controversies and comments made about A-Rod and this issue of steriods was important and newsworthy information to provide, and it gave me a glimpse as well into why this article is being written to begin with.

 One thing I really did not like about the writing of this article was that I think that the writer was a little bias by adding his/her opinion to the article. There was a part of the article that said, “The New York Yankees star could have been exaggerating about the amount of tests, he could have been selected for an unusually high number of checks or he might have dropped a clue about something else.” I think that writing this takes away from the quotes and statements that the writer is using in the article from A-Rod. The writer is also putting in his/her opinions that A-Rod may not be a credible guy, and I think that is unfair for I am sure that the writer does not really know A-Rod on a personal account and even if he/she did, it is not right for a journalist to put in his or her opinion in an article that is not in the op-ed section.

All in all I thought that this article was great. It was written well, structured well, had great sources, was completely newsworthy and had a great focus. My only criticism is that the article could have done without the paragraph I just mentioned, and opinions should have been left out.

On a side note though, I think that this article was also interesting and controversial because it shows how during a time when many atheletes are taking performance-enhancing drugs, we as a society accuse those who do well merely because of talent. I think that we accuse those who are great because we are either jealous or we do not think it is possible for those to do so well while others who do as well as them are taking drugs.

This may be a little old, but I wanted to do something about ledes in the Reporter and this is the most recent news story on its website. The article is about the minimum wage increase and the effect it has on Stetson financial aid, but I think it focuses on the wrong aspect of the story and buries the interesting stuff.

The lede for this story is: “Minimum wage in the state of Florida was increased by the Federal Government from $6.67 to $6.79. While the increase allows the public to earn more money, the issue of “using up” the financial aid awarded to work study students is becoming more apparent.”

It seems like the most newsworthy part of the story is the second sentence, since it not only affects Stetson students more but is also something they probably don’t know about. In addition to not putting this first, the article doesn’t really go into the issue of the school running out of money. Also, the lede that the story goes with is just a piece of very specific information, which in inverted pyramid style should probably go further into the body.

Here’s my idea for a better lede, after reading the rest of the article: “Stetson work study students will work fewer hours for the same amount of pay this semester after a rise in the state’s minimum wage.”

Also, for some reason this article is called “A Dollar an Hour?” I can’t tell why, since the minimum wage only increases by $0.20 an hour and nowhere does it mention a dollar an hour for anything.
 

When it rains it pours, according to the recent article from USA Today, “Spirits high on Oscar’s Red Carpet Despite the Dreary Weather,” this did not ruin a night at the Oscar’s! The article which fails to state exactly how much rain there was or what was done to stop these Oscar worthy actors from getting soaked was not exactly award winning itself. One might even question why the spirits of these stars was so high especially when they have to put up with such terrible weather.

Unfortunately the rain doesn’t stop, not even for celebrities but apparently it doesn’t matter as the awards were still given out and the stars still came out in their most glamorous attire. Would it even be possible to cancel the Oscars because of rain? I think not, especially when so much time and effort that obviously goes into planning the very large event. As the famous saying goes “the show must go on” and apparently it did!

I decided to comment on both of these stories because it’s rare to read feel-good stories in the news that were in no way related to negative events, but I stumbled upon two of them in the same day on msnbc.com. A really nice, hard-working couple from a town near Savannah wins $270 in the lottery, and a college in Philadelphia gets $5 million anonymously in the mail. I love to read stories about nice, humble people who catch a break in life, and those about people who help without expecting anything in return. Positive stories in the news are newsworthy, in my opinion, because they stand out in the midst of all the negative events being covered. It’s always more fun for me to read stories about positive happenings, contrary to the belief that negative news draws readership/viewers. I liked reading that the Georgia couple were going to make sure that this money would help their grandkids have a wonderful life, and that the $5 dollar donor wished to remain anonymous and fund a scholarship for women and minorities. Whether they’re the most newsworthy events in the U.S. is questionable, but I’m glad they received some attention for those readers that want to hear some good news for a change.

I have always believed the front page of a paper and/or the front page of a website covers the most important or intriguing news of the day. I found it interesting that on the front page of the USAToday website there was an article about who among 19 states and 9 foreign countries, including New Zealand, Romania, Macedonia and the Philippines has the best tasting water. The story reports on the 18th Annual Berkeley Springs International Water Tasting which was held this Saturday, February 23. The contest is known as the world’s largest and longest-running water tasting. What was even more interesting is that the smog-infested Los Angeles won the title.

The reporter gave a brief description of the actual judging and includes quotes from the event producer Jill Klien Rone. I would have liked the reporter to have answered a few other questions including:

1. Who are past winners?

2. Why was Los Angeles chosen as the winner? 

3. Quotes from judges of the taste testing.

4. How are these judges? Water experts?

5. How is a state or country considered for the contest?

6. Ultimately some additional information about the contest itself because it intrigues me.

I recently came across an article on the film based on the life story of French Elle editor Jean-Dominique Bauby.    The article titled,” The Truth about the Diving Bell and Butterfly,” was found on Salon.com.  I chose this article for this week’s blog discussion based on our previous class discussion of articles with an inverted pyramid style.   This article begins with the discussion of the film, which occurred most recently having been nominated for four Oscars.  Yet for all of the details, the most interesting part of the story comes in the conclusion of the first section.  The article author Beth Arnold reveals that close family members of the deceased (Bauby) do not believe that the film was an honest portrayal of Bauby’s personal life.   Which raises the question of what would be the most important lead for Arnold to focus on?  Arnold should have focused on the human interest aspect of the story, better explaining the real life conflict between Bauby’s ex-wife and Bauby’s girlfriend. 

Which raises an interesting question, can the family sue the screenwriters for not accurately portraying the life of Bauby?  I feel the family does not have a case.  The ex-wife of Bauby was a part of the screenwriting process from the beginning as a representative for her children’s interests.  Also, the  film is said to be  “based upon a true story.”  I think  that screenwriters are given some leeway when creating an artistic effort which has to appeal to audiences across the globe.  By placing the slight friction in Bauby’s love life the screenwriter was more than likely trying to keep audiences emotionally captivated.  I don’t think its necessary for the family to criticize the film, when they had a chance to make changes from the beginning. 

Arnold’ article continues with references to the actual story of Bauby’s life, followed by a discussion of the altered story in the film.  The party which should be truly outraged at having Bauby’s life story altered is the long-time girlfriend of Bauby, Florence.  When Bauby went into the hospital Florence stayed by his side until his last breath.  Yet, Florence’s influence is ignored  throughout the film.  That is the falsehood which should be corrected in the film. 

‘Nader announces third party run for president’, from USAToday.com, is an article that addresses the impact that Ralph Nader’s run for president as a third party candidate may have on the ‘08 presidential race.  Democrats fear that he will pull votes away from their party, while republicans welcome his entry for the same reason.  However, Nader refuses to see himself as a spoiler, instead insisting that he helps defend Americans’ individual rights as consumers and as citizens.  But then why does he openly suggest that the Democrats should be able to “landslide the Repulicans” this year?  Although realistic, I think it curious that he even suggests that he won’t be able to win.  However, I understand that his point in running is that, if not for him, perhaps the Democrats would be too conservative.    This article has an effective, summarizing lead, and conveys the most important statements made by the liberatarian candidate on NBC’s Meet the Press.  I like how the writer let Nader and other presidential candidates do the majority of the talking, using strong quotes in the process.  One thing that I will criticize, however, is the copy editor’s diligence, as there is a phrase that is used twice in the story:  “Nader vociferously disputes the spoiler claim, saying that only Democrats are to blame for losing (the 2000 election).” Furthermore, using the adverb “vociferously” here is not only unnecessary, but weak too.  It sounds a little editorialized and like the writer was trying to utilize a big word from his/her vocabulary. 

Saturday’s Orlando Sentinel review of Nissan’s soon-to-be-premiered Cube by The Los Angeles Times’ Dan Neil suggests that vehicles of this type are the immenent future of the American automobile.  Already a staple of Japanese roadways, the Cube reportedly offers efficiency through it’s small stature and logical shape.  According to the article, “(a cube) contains the largest volume of any cuboid shape for a given surface area, or linear size.  Which is to say, it’s the most space efficient of all boxes.”   Thus, Nissan’s new wagon maximizes its carrying capacity by utilizing this efficient shape: five adults can apparently fit into this thing.  Now, I don’t doubt that American vehicles will become more gas-friendly and less damaging to the atmosphere in the near future.  However, I have to ask: does it hold five adult Americans or five adult Japanese?  With the current 1.4 liter in-line four-cylinder engine–and even with the 1.8 liter (what a difference) that will come in American models–this vehicle would be an absolute death trap on the highway with five normal-sized adults in its belly.  Is the U.S. going to return to it’s fuel crisis era 55 mph speed limits on highways?  If so, I can see this little guy doing the job.  If not, it’s going to appeal only to a small niche market of consumers who don’t drive on the interstate.  Furthermore, the vehicle’s shape produces incredible drag at higher speeds, undoubtedly squelching the fuel economy that is its best selling point.  Is that supposed 40 mpg on the highway read at 50 mph, or at a more realistic 70?  From my experience with my girlfriend’s Honda Element, wind-resistance could be a major pitfall of this theoretically ingenius design.  Which leaves me wondering: is it necessary to utilize a cubic shape when it comes to the front windshield?  Perhaps a little more angle up front would result in much improved, and much needed, aerodynamics.  Hey, at least braking won’t be a problem–simply let off the gas and you’ll probably screech to a halt without ever having to touch the decelerator.  Although, it will likely be the drivers of vehicles approaching the Cube that will be the ones hitting their brakes.  All in all, Mr. Neil’s opinion that the Cube is the car of the future is provacative, but unrealistic if drastic cultural and legal change doesn’t happen before the cars’ expected 2009 debut.  And, it could consider the performance implications of a one-and-a-quarter ton, 90 horsepower box beyond simply mentioning that it is slow.  How about the handling?  Braking?  Ride?  What about features?  Do they cut out the A/C to achieve that 40 mpg?  Sure, like Neil says, this thing is “cute”, and efficiency is the future–but at what cost?  This review leaves plenty of questions to be answered–ones that Nissan will have to consider before stocking this pint-sized go-cart of a car in its American showrooms.