Women + Self Esteem (discussion)

Ever since 4th grade I have been a very insecure person. A boy told me he was giving me cookies to make me more fat rather then out of nice gesture. Immediately, I was changed (not in a good way). I was consumed of thoughts about how fat I was (because I think that now.) and feeling very insecure in my own skin, thinking everybody was thinking the same thing; I am fat. I wanted to runaway... move away out of Minnesota! I have recently for the past couple of years have started to let go and really confront these insecurities head on. I have been tons of research and been finding some awesome revelations for myself!

The company Dove has done numerous of studies on women + self-esteem in women. They are campaigning for women, for women to feel beautiful in their skin because really it's like an epidemic across the country.  Studies have found that:

•  6 in 10 women stop what they love doing because feel bad about their looks.
• Only 4% of women around the world consider themselves beautiful (which is up 2% from 2004)
• 72% of girls feel tremendous pressure to be beautiful
• More than half (54%) of women globally agree that when it comes to how they look, they are their own worst beauty critic.

In the media women are viewed as objects: being a part of a beer bottle for an ad, that is so dehumanizing and we don't realize it, but it is. A photo of a model on the cover of magazines or celebs is saying to all the young girls/women that they should have no pours because the cover girls have this unnatural, unreal flawless skin. Thanks photoshop. As women we try so hard to reach this unreachable height of perfection. Beauty is not just looks.

Now, I can't say that the boy who said what he said to me so many years ago is to blame (he is, but he isn't) because I don't know if now would be the year that all my insecurities would arise, I just don't know. What I do know is that I'll be damned if I don't think for the next 5 years that I am truly ugly and deserve to be alone.

Women are backing away from job opportunities because are feeling so insecure about themselves.

• In the workforce: 60% in 1999, 2011: 58.1% which is down 0.5 from 2010
• In Congress we have 18% filled of women
• In the senate we have 17.9% of the 435 seats filled by women in the U.S House
• Japan is saying their economy will go up 13% with women in the workforce

The actor Bruce Willis last week said himself that women should rule the world and he is about as manly as it gets! There are deeper problems in society and their perception on women. We're bitchy, nagging, stubborn, emotional, but the male is the opposite of all these things: determined, passionate, head strong, compassionate. WHAT? No wonder women are backing out of the workforce even high positions. Yes, we have women in the workforce and Congress, Senate, entertainment business, but are we really aware of it?

Dove did a very clever study where they said to this group of women that they made a patch that is supposed to make you feel differently about yourself, make you feel that you are beautiful. They wore for a certain amount of time and kept a video diary. As each day progressed they said they felt much better about themselves and that they felt beautiful each day no matter the hard circumstances. At the end, the women that was the head of the study said there was nothing in the patch. In other words the patch did nothing at all.

Dove also does these sketches where they will have a women whatever age come in and tell an artist what they think they look like. Before that they will get to know a stranger for a few minutes then they will come in and say what they think that person looks like. The results are incredibly different from when the women describes herself. It is so amazing to see these women realize how beautiful they are.

The YouTube channel SoulPancake has a webseris, What She Said, and it multiple videos on these very issues for women today. About body image, cofidence,  women in power and our purpose, aging and death, to parents and parenting even. But there is a poet, Natalie Patterson , they have in these videos and one of her own and she speaks her spoken word poems that are so inspiring and revealing for me in so many ways. 

When it comes to feeling good in our own skin I think that it is hard for anybody because we feel (and sometimes we do) have these critics in our life; our parents, friends, people at school, teachers. For me a critic can be a complete stranger because I that self conscious and aware.

So, can we put the judgement away? The pressure? Please? And how can we go forward as a society so that women can feel okay with who we are? LOTS OF WORK TO BE DONE!

Discussion

I started to research the profession journalist, reporter, person who captures and documents a story and being well, helpless. Unable to do or change anything in, or on a certain situation. Their job is to tell the story, have the voices and hearts of the people be heard and shown and move on to the next story.

I listened to two Ted Talks from journalists Janine di Giovanni and Giles Duley. Janine is a foreign correspondent who has reported in Bosnia during the Bosnian War and many other wars in; Libya, Congo, Egypt, etc. She has so many horrific stories that she can tell and a couple she tells really stuck out to me. 

She had friend in who lived in Sarajevo, Bosnia. Her friend was on her way to work when she looked up she saw a giant tank moving forward in the streets and crashing down buildings as it came. In her mini skirt she crouched down behind a garbage can and thought to herself, "I feel like I am in Alice and Wonderland. Like I'm sinking into the giant black hole." A long while after that Janine and her same friend were walking down a street and they began seeing these red lawn chairs at least 12,000 that went down the street and looked never ending; as far as the eye could see. The red chairs represented all the people (adults and children) who had been killed in the Bosnian War, at that time so far.

Janine says she knows she can't stop war. Knows that she doesn't work for the U.N., or President to a middle eastern country. You feel for the people and the country, you hear so many stories of lose and utter pain and usually strikes and pain and desire to want to stop the war, but she knows that isn't her job. Her job is report and tell these stories of civilians, happenings of the war Yes, she may feel helpless (she has), but all she knows is that she is "a witness."

Words that have stuck out me and come to my mind listening to her Ted Talk were: delude & witness. I have studied these words and this is what I got:

Delude: 1. to mislead the mind or judgement of: device, trick 2. obsolete a: frustrate,disappoint b: evade, elude

Witness: a person who sees something (such as a crime) happen

Then I looked at the definition for reporter. 
Reporter: a person who writes new stories for a newspaper, magazine, etc., or who tells the news on the radio or television

What I take from these words and from what Janine said is... that as a reporter who decides to cover over sea stories (any stories really) you cannot delude you mind and say, "That when you go over there to that place you can change the people or that country." "That you can change the circumstances of the people's situation." You're simply the witness that see's the things that happen to them and bring their silent, invisible voice's a voice!

As sad as that may sound there is still a silver lining to being a reporter even though we may not be able to change reality. Photojournalist Giles Duley has a inspirational and horrific story, just a little background of Duley first; he used to be a photographer in the fashion industry and music photography, but quit to pursue his interest in documentary photography. In 2011, Duley was in Afghanistan and unknowingly stepped on a improvised explosive device, losing both of his legs and left arm.

Duley at first doubted his work, thought it was over, but then he thought about his story (he became aprat of a story) and about how you can called be disabled, but not be disabled, that he can still work. He is quoted saying, "It (the lose of three limbs) is going to give me greater insight and empathy into people's suffering and hopefully put me in a better position to tell their stories. Because that's all I am, a storyteller." Through his own tragedy Duley has learned that his storytelling has made a difference because he has captured stories of people all around the world and with his stories he can make a difference.

The main thing that draws me to this topic and discussion is I see the acceptance in these two journalists as humans. The acceptance in their life with circumstances and their small ability to change the world, but in a HUGE way they shed light to poverty, war, controversial topics, etc. And it doesn't matter if no one, or nothing brings total attention to the story, or topic because they have done their... duty. Both make a difference in the world through their work and within their work have found peace, aspiration, gratitude, thankfulness, and grace, along with empathy. As do many other journalists I am sure with their work.

Someday I hope to gain that gracefulness in my work and total acceptance in the fact that what I do is enough, but that will probably happen when I'm 60. Ha. I am one to want to bring that voice to the people in the darkest corners of the world and hope in some small way that I did the right thing... I have made a difference. I hope in my work I can bring a light and voice to those who need it and ultimately be a storyteller.

Satire...

I have had fun thinking and discussing this topic. Satire... I honestly had no idea what it was, I thought it was something you did with chicken before you cook it, but that obviously didn't really make sense I thought quickly after. In discussion time it made sense that we are less informed about world news then Europeans because news here is boring! I get why people pay attention to Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart because their funny. They crack jokes and people laugh, they also inform you about news and "worthless" facts while making you laugh.

For me satire is a tool used for comedians to do the one thing that we all want to do... COMPLAIN! But we can't complain and express ourselves the way we want all the time because then people would get mad and controversy would start. But for people like Jon Stewart who uses his own show to use satire on world issues and politics, he could go to town on complaining about our gov't, the people in our gov't, and how our society is because he uses satire = making people laugh = people not caring.

Fake news, or the headlines on Yahoo, Google for this generation is better to them because a) they're technology based and b) we like to get away from the moroseness of the world... we want to laugh and have a good time and not care about stock going up or down, or gas prices.

Now, me personally I don't watch satire. (Well, I do, but I don't.) I watch BBC News, but also World News on CNBC, etc. They [I feel] are bringing the news as it is. They stick to the facts and they know what they're doing. I used to watch CNN, but their discussion shows they would have about a certain case or topic were just too much because it would drag for 5 hours at a time. There was nothing holding me back from flipping the channel at the break. Plus, the discussion always felt one sided no matter how many people brought up a different view.

So, with that said I do think there are certain news show/ channels that need to changed their attempt on making news. I would like to see news channels be like... none denominational when it comes to politics, religion, etc. Because I think that that's where a lot of one sided opinions happen and the corruption of a news channel wanting profit because a certain group of people like to watch it. If we're watching the news why not make it accessible for everyone to watch?

Shows like the Daily Show again [I feel] are are comedic outlets for people at the end of the day. They make you laugh, yes they show and bring a different side of a well talked about topic, but they're entertainment. I believe entertainment is not news... doesn't have the same feel... and shows like World News, the BBC, etc. They do bring news, they inform you of things going on concerning our country, military, companies here in America, certain high globe world events that effect us.

Media Creating Your Own Reality..

The Corporate Media of this generation has become more concerned about how much money they make, then the consumers who are making accounts with their company and, or store. We in the process are making them BILLIONAIRES! We contribute to social media and popular stores like; Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Target, etc. everyday. Now there are some positives when it comes to using social media. Sharing photos with family & friends who are long distances away, interacting with people you don't see often, or even letting people know in your life what you're doing. But then there are some poor choices of social media.

People diarrhea all over social media! "He loves me, he loves me not", "we're friends, no we're not friends", "why are you guys, so mean to me?... Bitches", "They're not my friends, now they are." People run their mouths and they don't shut up; people loose their jobs sometimes because they run their mouths about an indecent at work or another co-worker, so head bosses think they can't trust that person who just diarrhea d all over their Facebook account about a situation.

These sites and apps have made us make this persona about ourselves that has us become one person on their site, and through text as well, and another with people. We can't do face to face with people we avoid people at school or in public, but on Facebook, "Oh! Love you sweetie!" It is bizarre to me and I think that these social sites/apps have contributed a lot of this bizarre-o behavior on these sites. They have given us an out when it come to doing life with others. I'm saying I am against Facebook, Twitter, etc. because I use them for purposes of school, extended family, church, etc. But I think these sites have done most of us good.

When we do spew these things these companies keep our data like Snapchat. They keep a copy of the photos we snap and the words we put with our photos.. that is a bit scary to me! I am a very private person in general, so unless I have known you since childhood, or your family, friend... you're not going to know anything about me. So, knowing that these social sites that yes, I do contribute too are taking these private details of my life and possibly are going to try to make a sale off it. It's scary and thinking about how more involved and advanced we are I think that we really need to educate our younger generation!

The elderly generation is not advancing, even some may own an iPhone they still read a newspaper. I saw an older the other day eating his lunch and reading his newspaper. They are fine with how they get their news. Now, we may still subscribe to a magazine like Vogue, People, etc. Which is entertainment news, but mostly our news comes from WCCO, channel 5, Kare 11, and the news channels broadcasted from those networks. We have news on the go too. With apps that we can download on our iPhones, iPads, tablets, etc.

Bottom line, why aren't okay with how we are getting news now? What do we have to keep looking to how much better we can get our news? People seem fine with how they get already today... people have a system that seems to work for them in how they get their news. Most importantly out of anything we need to know how to use our sources and sites for news and media properly because many do not know how, and that's a big problem.

News!

For the 10 Day News Source my news source(s) were E! News and TMZ. These two sources are celebrity gossip news sources, so 24/7, 24 hours a day all the news you get from these sources is about celebrity's like Angelina Jolie, Jennifer Garner, Lady Ga Ga, Lily Allen, Kelly Clarkson, Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez, The Kardashians, Kayne West, etc. Just to name a few popular celebs who are always in the pop culture news lately. 

I went back and forth each day between E! News and TMZ. Prior with this I was familiar with both E! and TMZ because I admit I am a movie go-er/ TV addict who oddly has my favorite celebs and it's fun for me to hear the news of what's going on in their life, in any in one day about them. Now, I will say the whole concept of people fantasizing about celebs and people hounding them for a picture of whatever is weird, but at the same time I get why people are so into these celebs. 

There are some big differences between these sources and when it comes to how they portray themselves on TV and the web. E! has been around for a long time and they have moved with the times when it comes to the look of their website and it's neat, professional, and very easy to get around on. Being owned by NBC they are able to be on the red carpets at: Golden Globes, Oscars, Emmy's, SAGS, etc. They are the #1 source it's said for celebrity news. They have an office of professionals that get the latest news and have "friends" or "buddies"; basically sources that are somehow webbed into Hollywood and can confirm or not about what is true and what's not, if there is a question at hand on something.

E! has it's own channel and a number of shows that air on the channel. Besides the show E! News they have Fabulist; all about the latest trends, Guiliana & Bill; reality show about E! anchor Guiliana and her husband Bill, Jessie & Eric; reality show about the country singer and football player, & Total Divas; reality show in the lives of WWE Divas. The very popular family Kardashians have multiple shows with E! There are many more shows that are and have been on E!, but it shows how popular E! is.

TMZ on the other hand... gosh, what do I say? It's just so... gross! I swear a 16 year old teenage boy made the website for him and his buddies to jag off and then some dumb person for Warner Bros. thought, "Hey! Lets buy this celeb website!" So, he and his buddies could jag off. 40% of all the celebrity news they have is about some sex scandal or a new sex tape that has just come out and they give these sketchy, "juicy" details. Some of the news they do is based on a true celeb event, but mainly their stuff they get is from directly the streets of Los Angeles.

TMZ has it's own one hour show on FOX 9 here in Minnesota and also in MN has a radio show on mytalk 107.1. TMZ is a much smaller brand name then E! and in the past has been well criticized and has had some legal problems. The TMZ show different, the small staff gets together and discusses with their boss who always has a marker and coffee thermos in hand about the day's list of event in the lives of celebs. They show camera footage if they have it on a story and basically just sarcastically crack jokes at the celebrity's expense.

With all of this said, I these two sources were not the only ones I saw in one day. Yes, I focused on these two sources, but I was able to catch the 5 o'clock news on WCCO and then E! News at 6 o'clock. Then every so often TMZ at 9 o'clock. I would not recommend people to only focus on these sources because they focus on celebrity's not on the weather, or important news that is happening in Minnesota. The news that changes and impacts your life for now here in MN.

Design!

    I don't consider myself to be a good page design or anything like that. With that said, as much of a lack of confidence I had with designing and feeling like what I had done was good, I had so much just fooling around on InDesign and using different tools; learning a few new things that I didn't know this past year using InDesign. Working on Hoofprint has taught me alot about design and how to be better designer.

    When it comes to the technical side of design with font, shapes, size, blocks, color etc. I somewhat space out, but I feel like I have a good grasp on design. I do think design is important when it comes to your page because you want to look at your page and look at it for what...ever? But you want your page to flow, you want the elements to all flow together on the page and have the consumer be able to move down, across your page.

     With design you can make things bold and pop that catch someone's attention. What you may or may not bold, highlight, or extenuate may or may not a person's view on topic. What I have come to learn with learning more on design is that very same thing; what type of font, what you bold, what kind of pictures you include in the blog, and how you use the space on you page, all can determine how someone perceives or thinks of something. You can pull someone to into something or a person can look at the page and flip to the next one because they are not interested in the page and what is has on it.

  

Good Story... Pastor Scott

For this blog I interview my churchs' senior Pastor, Pastor Scott McLauhglin. I have known him for 4 years, my mom works at our church as director of youth ministries, so since then I have been able to get to known him... in depth. I find his story with his faith relateable. He brings some pretty hard points to the table and I think some are answered and others you have to trust.

"I was blessed to grow up in a very Christian family. My parents involved in church and Billy Graham Association, neighborhood Bible Studies. Always praying at the door with my mom before leaving to school. Prayer at the supper table before meals, confirmation, I was an acolyte. Back in the day they had them when they had more retractile services, acolytes would light the candles and you would have acolyte sticks. So, when I was an acolyte which meant you wore these robes and sometimes you would get in trouble for goofing off, but on the chancel on the radeys platform they had a bench where the Pastor would sit there, or Pastors would sit there and, so would acolytes.  That was cool for a young person, to be getting that kind of a privilege. I had a piano teacher and she was always interested in missions and so we would spend a good part of my half hour lesson talking about missions."

Some people may think because people have faith, or are in a religion that restricts them from doing childish, stupid things as a kid, but the truth is... NO IT DOSEN'T!! Pastor Scott shares some silly things he and his buddies did growing up and what his own personal struggles were as a kid growing up.

"Halloween was big for doing a lot of things I am ashamed of, kids going out and feeling our liberty to teepee houses. I proposed marriage in first grade, the teacher went out of the room and I did something I would get in trouble for, so this girl was going to tell, so I said, “Promise not to tell, I’ll marry you.” She moved in third grade so I didn’t have to marry her!"

"I had to take speech class, I didn’t pronounce my r’s and s’s right and that was kind of embarrassing because they took me out of class for that too. So, everyone kind of knew what was going on; felt very self-conscious about that. Reading was my favorite subject. They had a, Great Books, it was called and they just encouraged students to read so called "classics" and so we were able to get out of class with other children that would get together and talk to others about the book you were reading, so that was fun. I liked english... I liked everything in school.”

More down the line Scott went to seminary school and well, he can tell the rest of the story.

“I did a biology majored first. I remember I was standing outside a class, biology class on bottomy and just listening to the instructor teach. I wasn’t even in that class and it just struck me ‘Am I really that interested to get a major in biology?’ I guess I wasn’t; I decided it was just too much work."

"It was seminary in Chicago, the big issue for me was suffering, what’s know as the Odyssey. How can you justify God when there is all this evil in the world? Is there a God? Could there be a God without the evil going on in the world? For me it was a kind of philosophical thing for me. I read a book called ‘After Auschwitz’ written by a Jewish scholar basically dealing with the whole thing of human history. So, I wasn’t an atheist I was just like, 'I have to figure this out. I have too many questions.' The answers that I got didn’t satisfy me and so I did do a lot of searching and questioning and not saying there is a God, not saying there isn’t a God I just need to figure this out for myself. So, I did a lot of reading, ton of reading."

"I had kind of a spiritual experience of experiencing Christ in the room with me and the presence of Christ. I just knew that he was present and I knew he was real, so I got down on my knees and rededicated my life. It’s hard to explain, but it was a grey February afternoon and I came to my apartment and it was Friday, so I was able to take off early from work that day took a nap in my chair. I woke up and there was a light presence and... I just knew."

Scott told me breifly how he went back seminary a while after rededicating his life.

"I think Catherine said, because she knew, in sense I had a call even as a boy to be a missionary, or something. So she suggested, 'Why don’t you take some evening classes at seminary.' In doing that it really I heard again the call to go back into seminary to finish what I started, but I never dreamed I would be back because I had a job, good job, but I didn’t like it. It was business and I hated business, but you know, God gave me favor. Looking back God gave me favor and kept me from getting into all kinds of things. Bottom line God was faithful when I was faithful, so you look back and you see his hand and his province, so he was stirring me and giving me confidence in my whole speech thing because part was standing in front of people from time to time, so God called me out of my insecurities."

Pastor Scott reflects on his first church, a Three Point Perish church, and also reflects on himself, being a Pastor. How well has he done, does he think he has failed in anyway?

"It was a Three Point Perish, so three congregations. I had internships and all that, but that was my first ordained church. Before that I was a helping out at churches in Pasadena and California. It was good, good way to cut my teeth you know, it was demanding physically speaking, and emotionally speaking, and spiritually. You have to go to three Council meetings because you have three congregations and all that, but it was a good to way to wear all hats. I was Youth Pastor, Pasto for everything and sometimes when you get called to like a... if I went to a church like North Heights, where me and Catherine were members there, they put you with one job, and you would do only that job.

"As a Pastor you always feel, I think it’s common, but you feel inadequate, for the calling. That’s probably good in a way because then you're not self-reliant; I think that’s one way to keep us humble and dependent upon the Lord for that. The minute you get proud of something... whatever you may call it your success is not really your success at all as the world defines it, you know 'To God be the glory'. You know glorifying yourself is a huge danger in this line of work. I think I’ve always tried to be open to new things, so I think that’s something I’m happy about, so yeah just being open to new ideas, things. The church has changed a lot during my generation and even this current generation. Some of them good, some of them bad"

Choice: Is it good or bad???

We are an advanced generation that keeps moving forward. We don't settle for something that is nice because we want something that is beautiful- the best! Which is exactly what has happened journalism today. Blessed with the option to only read what we want to read and nothing more is a choice, we make it.

We don't seem to look back when it comes to news because we have so much going on right now, here and now that who wants to take the time to look back on the better times? (my opinion) Now is the better times and we are striving for the all time "American Dream". America is a nation constantly moving, moving, moving. So, we need a reliable source to get our news, but we also like to pick up once in awhile that new issue of Vogue, People, Life, Time, etc.

I think we need choices because without choice we would be robots. Doing the same thing day in and out, and we would be totally bored with ourselves. Now social media and sites like Facebook, Twitter, Google, they don't always give us choice. They give us what we want, we they think we want. It is as if they want us in a little bubble.

Now, when choice comes into an equation I think peoples' minds get blown up because we really don't know how to make a decision on a choice we have. Think bout it... they other day my sister, Ella (4), she asked me for something to drink and I led her to the fridge and said, "You can have juice, water, milk: soy or cow, or have some of momma's ice tea." It took her 5 minutes to make up her mind, then when I was pouring her the drink she changed it! Ella changed her mind like 5 times- I got frustrated.

Keeping on topic cause we could go into a whole other topic there, but that is choice making from a 4 1/2 year old's level. Think of what choice we have to make today as teenagers: Should I get the soy latte, or the mocha? Should I go to the concert, or stay home and do my homework? Adults who work at high corporate banks-that's tough. Choice is all around us and we can't defeat it, we can only base or choice by who we are as human beings and by our... values, morals.

Making bad choices I think usually results in the consumer. Again, 'should I go to that concert tonight or stay home and do homework?' Answer: CONCERT!!! Or 'I could go to work today, but I can have that girl take my shift...won't go to work today.' We can make up all these answers because they are rarely any consequences to our choices, or decisions. So, we think 'I can skip work again and it won't be problem.' 'I can skip school another time and it won't matter and another time.' Because usually we can get away with our choices, maybe sometimes we have to take the fault for our choices, but we get the illusion that our choices don't effect us.

As a society though, they have. I think that we have become closed minded. We only believe what we want to believe and not be challenged for it, but the minute someone challenges our views, beliefs; our guard is up and we get angry. Customizing sites I think has been a big reason for that. People now are only getting sites, friends, and recommended pages that are most likely in the perspective that they believe.

Magazines give you alot to look at when reading; numerous photos, stories that are in depth, and deep. Newspapers are fresh news that have real content that is recent, while magazines are old when we get them; probably a month old news. But magazines have real stories they are long and very descriptive- they give a more deeper look at the person of the story. In writing stories that are under 140 characters or less I think would be easy because that is how we usually talk to eachother; 140 characters or less. So, I think we are moving with where 'technology journalism' is going.

I spit out so much in this blog, so to over view. We are constantly moving forward there is no backwards for us as a generation who strives for the American Dream. Our news intake that we get everyday is becoming smaller, we only get the kinds of stories we read every day- it's only in our viewpoint. Choices are great, we're not robots let us think for ourselves because with all this striving we want to go somewhere, but we need to learn how to make better decisions. We need to learn from our past bad choices and as far as journalism in newspapers or magazines, under 140 character... well, lets say I think the newspaper will never die because again, it brings us solid, recent news, but we are going to want that Vogue issue of Rihanna already on stands because she is an icon to many women in today's world. Shorter news I think will be "in" soon because 140 characters or less is how we talk we to eachother all the time.

Future of Newspapers

In the articles I have read and seen and the presentations I have listened to, I have come to a conclusion that newspapers are coming to a slow end and "technology journalism" is so in! For the first time in class I am agreeing on something. I for the most part my self read newspaper websites off my phone, or magazine websites off my phone. My phone is the main thing I go to, to look at journalism. (In some small way that is a little scary & sad.)

I almost don't want the newspaper to go away because sometimes I do read it, and I feel so old school and vintage when I do- I like that feeling. Whenever someone reads the newspaper I think it is so fun because it is such a old age thing we think about. We now have apps, magazines, and magazine type of newspapers that we go to for news now and so with that I think in time, the real paper newspaper that you get on Sundays or every single, and read with your morning coffee will be gone. Reporting I think will be more personal though and straight to the point it seems people are not interested in the long and short of an article, they like, "here are the facts and here's what's happening" kind of a story.

During the preparation of this project I felt like I didn't have much to do, I wanted to go a little deeper in the idea, but nobody seemed that interested. The concept though I love because I love women, I am proud to be a women and I love talking to women and talking about women. We are very interesting creatures, but complicated too. Taylor in my group put the idea out for an all women's magazine, then I came up with the name; First-Wave Females.

Something I would differently in my group would be a little more in "their face" about what is going on because with feeling like I had nothing to or I wasn't making anything I felt a little lost in the process. I did help come up with ideas and such, typed them down for us, but nothing like creating the cover page. With the cover page I thought we could of done better and I know how to "work" InDesign, but I didn't want to start anything like drama.

I would defiantly use the idea of an all women's magazine or app again because I just love that idea, and again I love women and talking with and about women. In future or even now women would like this because in the world we live in today it's hard for us. We are put up as objects and things to many and in the workplace we are stilled paid less then men. So, the appeal for women is totally there.

What is Journalism Anyway?

    Journalism is hard to define, anyone can say that. When trying to think of what it is nowadays you have so many definitions spitting out at you that you are frazzled and you can't really find a clear answer. All I can do is write, read, and accept what I think is journalism. Sometimes that means not everybody is going to agree with my perspective and personal view on journalism.

    I used to think of journalists as those people from the early 1900's to the 1960's with the professional suit, the popular press hat, little notepad, short little pencil, with the cigarette in the mouth. In movies the journalists are always in groups shouting the same questions or different ones at the same time and if they don't get their answer, what do they do? They lie. They make a headline that has everyone buzzing in town and the character who has this made up story about them in the papers is furious and it all connects with the storyline- for the movie. (In many ways Hollywood has influenced how people think of journalism today.)

    Never though did I think journalism was all about just making up stories. Journalism can be informative, it can also be a story from the journalists perspective (I think). The general definition of journalism is the activity or profession of writing for newspapers, magazines, or broadcasting news on the radio or television. Most of the time though we are so critical of people's writing especially when we form an opinion, but Robert Niles on his website says that publishing your opinion on whatever it is you are, is an okay thing to do.

    On this What is Journalism? website that puts you right to sleep, it never mentions anything about an opinion only about news and feature stories, and the tools of journalism. If you think about it though, who wants to read a stale and bias story, but I may not always agree with the writer and I may get mad or frustrated with the writer even if we are not engaged in a conversation. So, it comes to now is forming your opinion journalism... can you?

    For so long we have been hearing that journalism has nothing to do with bias, but journalists do it anyway. Anywhere you read you read, you read some form of bias, but we need to be loyal in our writing. We have a duty to tell the truth, Loyalty+Unbias=journalism. It's hard though! Super hard to make unbias and telling the truth come together because if we don't agree with what we are writing then why are we writing it? We got assigned it, we couldn't think of anything else... the list of excuses goes on.

    Like I said before I can only accepted what I think is journalism. We are all going to have opinions on what journalism is, and we could have days and days of discussion on it because it's sadly one of those things in our world today that gets influenced by people. People can think the paparazzi are doing journalism by stalking celebrities when really it isn't, that's just annoying probably.

 Truth. Or not?

    Truth is not a very commonly used word in journalism cause lets face it... nobody wants to hear or read the truth. Our society has worked so hard at not telling the truth that when it is said, or written, the people who are behind that truth they claim are scolded and frowned upon. As journalists we need to keep a newspaper, magazine, website, or blog up and running and keep our readers entertained and tuned in every day,week, or month to what you are writing about.

    There is a article http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/article/102541/Journalisms-First-Obligation-Is-to-Tell-the-Truth.aspx and in the this article it tells us that journalists have an obligation to tell the truth and sometimes people are fuddled to what the truth means exactly, or truth doesn't excite at all. That journalists for years have been saying that there are no steps to take for journalists to find that absolute truth. It ends with no definite answer with how can we tell the truth as journalists, or what the definition in truth for journalism is, but leaves it open ended like the author wants us to end it for him, but saying that finding the truth in journalism is a continuing process.

    Finding truth in anything is a continuing process like faith. You have so many people trying to tell truth which is basically God in faith; Christianity, but you have so many different influences in the world of faith today it's hard to believe just one person, or one church because a lot of times in faith we can't always have what we want and we want everything. We want everything we want and have it be the exception. Just like us journalists we want our articles to have everything we want, and have our articles be the exception, we want them to grab peoples attention, have them talk about it, have an interest in it, and may or may not support it.

    As people, the consumers, we are somewhat blindsided to this so-called "truth". We mainly believe what we read, we're not critical thinkers today because we depend on others most of the time for news, facts, and information. That's where us the journalists come in and as of now a lot of news is trash and not truthful. The news is trash because it's not real news if it's not truthful and yes, we want our articles to strive and be the best, but our we doing good by our society?

    Loyalty comes with truth meaning as journalists we have a certain obligation (again) and allegiance to tell the truth to our readers. As an aspiring journalist I know I have done most of what it is said of journalist when it come to loyalty and giving consumers truth. It is after all our duty to do so and I rather live and read of a world full of truth then not.

Are We Doomed?

    Aren't we already doomed, hasn't our generation already killed and destroyed good journalism by wanting to look at sexual crap and reading about celebrity's and their lives? WE ARE DOOMED!! We come up with these really unbelievable stories and even the most random-est and stupid story can pass and go on the telly, newspaper, magazine, or especially social media websites.

    We all know the big story that came out a few weeks ago about the actress Angelina Jolie and her preventive double mastectomy she got to lower her chances of getting breast cancer. Admittedly there was buzz about great she is and then stories about Brad Pitt and how he protected and was by her side every step of the way surfaced. More and more stories spinned off from this one story and became more about her boobies then about what a remarkable, and courageous thing she did and to share her story for other women to be inspired and start thinking about breast cancer is a very again courageous thing to do. We make these really significant stories into these twisted unimportant, uninspiring things because we take them to a level where they just don't need to go.

The Most Read Stories in the last 72 hours on People.com

1

Kenny Chesney: The Moment That Changed My Life Forever

READ IT

2

Wow! Ireland Basinger Baldwin Shows Off Bikini Body in Hawaii

READ IT

3

PHOTO: Rob Kardashian's Slim-Down Revealed

READ IT

4

Robert Pattinson, Katy Perry Wedding Rehearsal Crash Was 'Extra Exciting'

READ IT

5

Katie Holmes & Suri Cruise Spend Memorial Day Weekend in Florida

READ IT

 














    You can even go on social media sites and see the most random-est stuff ever! For  example CNN Breaking News website you would think is a pretty political  and worldly channel/website, right? Well, not so fast you get the one story  of a lifetime; Beyonce get's her booty slapped! Really? This is CNN where  we get world breaking news from and we get stories on Under pressure, Facebook says they'll do more on Hate . That is a real social issue on which  tons of people are trying to stop, hate and bullying on social media websites, but we still get these booty slapping stories because that's the kind of stuff people want to see and watch. Newsrooms are going by the social media sites and the more, and more by the public then by their own investigating and real reporting.

    We're more interested by other's and their lives then our own and what's happening in the world. Since celebs are such an easy target we take their lives and we get interested in them and we write stories on these famous people and since they entertain us and gives us music and films and books we think it's okay to just bash and praise them as we, please. Jay Rosen's Pressthink last year posted something on today's journalism and says, " Journalism will improve when it is made more useful to people." and " The profession of journalism went awry when it began to adopt the View from Nowhere." Maybe those things are true? We seem to get are opinions these days from nowhere and with all this crappy "journalism" people find no reason to watch the news, or tune into the real important facts.

 

    When your a little kid your learning what is right and what is wrong. By the time your six or seven years old your becoming an independent adult and you start making your own decisions. When you little though you go be example of your parents and you listen to what they say and observe what they do. You get their own personal opinions on controversial things in the world and for awhile you agree with them because that's the only thing you. Then you grow up and you to school have a few adult conversations and your decisions or stents on these controversial topics changes.

    In journalism we have our own personal definitions of what is right and what is wrong, but when does that get in the way of our decision making process on writing a story, or even printing a story and do they even change our influences around us? I think that your emotions and personal definitions do get in the way of right and wrong decision making. It all comes back to you and how you now take these controversial topics. We all have loyalties to someone or a group of people and you want to respect those loyalties because they're all people, or someone you know personally and you want to back them up. Values are another big thing in this right, or wrong decision making, you have certain values you get from childhood and maybe they change, maybe not. As a human being thought you generally stick to those values since your childhood and those values plus loyalties shape your decision making.

    Now, we get into conflict of interest. Should journalists be allowed to put their personal opinion in their story? I feel that this conflict of interest and right or wrong really go hand in hand because you get your personal opinions from the right or wrong and then sometimes your personal opinion slips into your story that maybe your passionate about. You usually wouldn't do a story that your connected to, but sometimes it happens and I think journalists shouldn't be allowed to put their own personal opinion in their story.

    Let the people have their own stents on the issue at hand, don't push your own opinion on them because your want to, for example legalize gay marriage. I think people get to wrapped in their own opinions when it comes to delicate topics like that and sooner then later people start believing the crap that's out their instead of listening to themselves. It is true that our generation has become to dependent on others and the news for their decision making. People go with the crowds and have others make their own story when they could be making theirs on their own. Reporters can take advantage of this because they can feed their own opinions to these people who have others lead their own opinions and get them to join them in their opinion.
 People avoid their personal morals and have others write them for them, or sometimes people leave their personal morals, values, and loyalties and lead others.

    Give us the people the facts on the situation and from the facts we can start to form our own personal opinion, this is editorial decisions. The question is should reporters give the facts or what people want? I say give us the facts, give us the facts because if you give the people what they want then your only going to get one side of the topic. With one side getting all the attention you're not going to get the others to see the other side, and people will lean more towards the one side of the topic. Needless to say, you have your own values and morals, and loyalties and those things can go in hand with your personal investment with the story and from there you will only be giving one side of a story, not all the sides of the story.

    Deception is the act of deceiving and to deceive is to be false, so when we say someone is using deception in their story in their investigative reporting they are, or are they? Journalist everywhere has an opinion on this hot topic and it has't to be an old-aged topic among journalists. You’re going undercover and you end up finding really important revealing information and it may bring justice, or it may not. The information may bring the truth to the American people and isn't that what we want anyway? To know the truth behind a situation to know our journalists are being truthful to us and working the hardest to bring us the truth, so we're not blindsided.

    When considering using deception in your story you can get and use multiple guidelines that other journalists have wrote, so you know what to do when using deception. When thinking of it though sometimes you can't get the information you want, or need unless you go undercover. Still you have people who are totally against it and think it's morally wrong, but for a story to be deemed okay deception must be the only thing that he/ or she as a journalist could do. Now there's a new prescriptive in this whole deception thing. So the people who just did deception are really being deceiving and others who did are because they had no other way to find the information out?

  What Would You Do? Is a telly show that broadcasts on ABC network and the show picks hot topics for actors to stage a scenario concerning that hot topic like a lesbian couple in Texas with kids and very verbal waitress. You get reactions from everyday people and then after a while the telly crew and the host John Quinones introduces him and the show etc. Deception? Not deception? How else would they get people’s reactions when people know the telly crew is there in the restaurant? You wouldn't get a southern man to thumbs up the waitress for kicking out a married gay couple and their kids because he doesn't want that televised so his friends maybe co-workers can see, his reputation would be damaged and he wouldn't want that, no one does.

    In newspapers you have to tell the absolute truth, or else it's called unethical journalism, or you were fabricating with information. This makes sense because the newspaper is local and you don't people going around not thinking the truth about someting because then bad things could come of that. The Star Tribune you have people every day here in Minnesota reading it about the news in the Twin Cities and around world at the same time. Then you have more political newspapers like the New York Times where you have a larger number of people reading that paper, but you can also follow both of these on Twitter so you get an even bigger audience. People reading the newspaper are going to be getting information about what's going locally in there city, town, or state and they read big stories that are in the headlines too about politics, for example during election time you always have stories on the candidates, and as a person who is voting you want to know the true specifics behind their plans for the country because your living in this country.

    Deception is a hard thing to absoutly know if it's ok or not to me, you got to think about it for awhile. Does it make sense for one to decieve people because they want raw hardcore investagative reporting? For the telly, are they just trying to make it entertainment for people at home, and trying to get views for the network? To me deception and using it is sketching because if you catch someone in deception they could make an excuse as to why they're using it and say the right thing instead of the ugly truth and sometimes you can hurt people with deception.

    Journalism is a very important part of today's world.  It tells people the news and latest stories of the United States and around the world.  People go look to a newspaper, magazine, or news website because they want to know what's going on.  Then you have down right stupid people who think they're journalists when they're not and spill a bunch of junk that is not even true on the internet.  Some people are drawn to the graphic images and videos that always leak to the internet when a tragedy happens, others not so much. The question of what should exactly be shown on the news, written about in the newspapers etc. Should we really let people see the gory photos and videos of people? Is a little fuzzy and I myself am 50/50 on this.

    I think the media's job in a tragedy is to focus on pin points of the tragedy and write stories on those pin points.  With the Boston bombing I think for a lot of people it would have been better for them to see the stories of the heroes who helped others that tragic day because let's be honest now, we know they're are going to be different news websites who are going to focus on the gory things of that day.  For the local news I think putting those hero stories out there and maybe some graphic pictures for the local people to hear would be better because they're getting some kind of effect of that day and seeing a little bit of what those people went through. Focusing more so on the overcoming of the injuries and such would be good here to because people still want to know what's happening.

    For parents who want to let their child see this and let them see what happens in a tragedy or for another reason I think instead of the gory pictures, show them the picture of the guy helping the injured women and teach them what they can do in a time when everyone around them is in total panic and let them see the good out of that day. At the same time you want them to know that what these men did was not ok and they hurt, killed a lot of people. I would show the faces of the guys and have them see who people are looking for in Boston and that they have no caught them and people are safe, but let them know they're some thousand miles away they are safe here in Minnesota, and no harm will come. 

    For the people in that tragic situation living in that town, or city at that point and time I don't think they should be getting gory and graphic stories.  Only the stories on heroes and the good that somehow came of that day because that can maybe let them see the upside of that horrific day.  I think the main headlines of that day and the manhunt only on their telly's would have been better because they're living in that city and they are the ones who are in that situation and going through that, not the people of Minnesota or Colorado. Another thing that would have been good is letting them know people are praying for their safety and well being in this time. People want to know others are their for them, all people want that when we are going through something shocking and tragic.

    People can take the Boston's bombings in different ways and people did that with their stories and photos.  I would have focused more on the heroes of the event, the people who helped others and saved people's lives, and the people who are now over coming their injuries.  There is a women who was a dancer and because of the bombs she had to have her foot amputated, now she is determined to get back to dancing even after losing her foot.  Stories like that I think people can feel a little less worried and scared and see the light at the end of the tunnel, the overcoming of this terrible event.  If you're more interesting in the injuries and what kind of injuries people got and just seeing the pictures of what people went through, I think you can go on a website and look for those things, but people don't need to publish them for the world to see on the telly becasue you're focusing on the bad of the situation, but what about the good and overcoming? As crazy as it sounds I think good still did happen that day.

   Consumers on the media of today have a divine right and choice weather they want to see the bad stuff of any tragic event that has happened.  You have many journalists independent or working for some big news station or newspaper that will choose to do the good stories, or the stories that focus on the killings, kidnappings, or abductions.  In some cases it is good for people to see the graphic and gory stuff when it comes to learning something important from that, or it's a situation where you could help find him/ or her, or them, but I think in times when the situation has nothing to do with us here in Minnesota we don't need know the bad details.

    January 9, 2003 students from a Ohio school distract sued their school distract; Wooster City School Distract on the grounds of violating their first amendment rights to freedom of speech and freedom of press. The plaintiffs attended high school at Wooster High School and were editors at their school newspaper the Blade and the school distract stopped the distribution of the newspaper because it was believed the newspaper contained a defamatory article.

     The students filed for a First Amendment case and while in court these students pushed for a temporary restraining order and seeking for the release of the newspaper for distribution. They were denied the temporary restraining order because they lacked factual information. Instead the judge filed a stipulated judgment and the two parties agreed to distribute the newspaper December 20, 2002. On January 15, 2003, the Distract distributed the modified Blade issue.

    This Blade issued an article on the Boards' underage drinking policy and accused the Board of violated the policy by giving preferential treatments to athletes that have been caught drinking. The Blades' advisor approved of the articles' publication and they made their standard 4,500 copied the issue featuring the story. An involving on the people quoted in the article who was drunk and interviewed for the article made the superintendent have the principal stop the press run of the newspaper.

    I think this case is interesting because the students were writing something about their school and it was truth, but the school board didn't want to caught. In my opinion I think this shows how much control a whole school distract has over the school newspaper. It controls the stories we print and put out for all the see.

Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier


    From this case I learned a lot about freedom of speech and how limited we are as students in school to say what we want and feel, even in a school newspaper. Finding out that public schools can limit our freedom of speech in school, but not the government, doesn't make sense to me. Hearing the other cases I learned that the 1st Amendment is everywhere and somehow really our rights to the 1st Amendment has gone down because of our socitey and the world we live today. It was interesting to hear someone say, "I love my country, but hate the goverment." Learning this all means... I know my limited rights in school and out in the world. I know as a journalist what my limits are when I write a story and put out in the world for all to see.

    Limitations that have been paced on the media are I think for the most part right. As a journalist you wnat people to look at your story and read. You want to be published in a newspaper, or tabloid and ultimately people want money. So you'll see any one do what they need to do get the job done so they get their cash prize at the end of the month. In other cases I think the media as in papparizzi need more restrictions, as a person I put myself in that celeb's shoes and I know I wouldn't want a camara man in my face every five seconds walking down the sidewalk. As for articles and writing I think there it's fine because writers can wrtie and update people on the controversal issues of today's times and people can read and see all sides of the a story.

    For school media and limiting us with speech and having the right to take out a story, or whatever, I think we need just a little more freedom. I think if we weren't so restricited then we could talk about bigger and more controversial topics and students oculd read them and hopefully get a reality check, or just open their minds. We do have the right ot freedom of speech and to take part of that away is wrong. In the Hazelwood case the principle decide he didn't like the topics of teen pregency and divorce that were written and instead of telling the students he just took out the stories. At least tell them; is what I think and through going to court and the Supreme Court it was ruled that though government may not have a say in speechin pubblic schools, the school does.

 Finding a job for college students in the "off" season

 I think this story is really important for all students to think about for college and getting a job while your in college. It gives you some free tips on what they expect to see at an college interview; behavior, clothing, and what to go in the interview expecting. You also get a few tips on the transition from college to career and that you should focus on professionalim and to go in the interview with realistic expections on how much responsebility you will get in the first week of your time working at a place.

  In the interview they gave people espically people who are seniors in high school and in college free tips on how to get a job more so correctly. You got to see a few slides with the info so you could write them down and not forget. The producers brought in Paul Timmins from the Career Services director for the U of M's College Libral of Arts and they did a interview with him and he answered questions and going into great details.

  In the beginning they had a survey by CareerBuilder.com and gave statics of the umemployment rate in the majority of U.S cities. They tell you that college studnets are jobless or under employed meaning that if you graduate in May or June you go find a job when the job market is flooded or "off" season. With that they tell you that students should check with their studnet services and take advantage of those services.

 

http://life.time.com/culture/mothers-day-special-life-with-famous-moms/#1
Alfred Eisenstaedt took this photo of Jackie Kennedy and her daughter Caroline in 1960.

    Everyone knows the Kennedy's and the legacy they have left behind in American History. John Kennedy was our President which brought his family higher into fame and his wife Jackie. Jackie Kennedy was a stunning women and a devote to her family and work as First Lady, she dazzled the world with her style and elegance and her confidence. Underneath the surface of the so called "glamorous life" that people thought John and Jackie had there was heart ache and frustration with John's affairs with multiple women. Jackie at one point mentioned divorce, but instead stood by her man. 

    The picture reminds that Jackie was more than the First Lady and an icon to people, but a mother. All she wanted to do was be a hands-on mother and be there for them. With her working schedule and duties how could she? It must of been hard to sneak a hour or two with them. You can see happiness, concentration, and delight on her face. She savors each moment she can get with her little girl and she loves reading, drawing and spending time with her. How she must want to stop that moment and be there forever reading her a bedtime story.

    It makes me wonder though... is this photo lying? I mean were, they modeling for Alfred the photographer? Was there no real moment between Jackie and Caroline because if it ins't they're good models. This photo caught my eye because i have always loved Jackie Kennedy and have found her to be an interesting person, so to her with her daughter is... interesting and it makes me think. Think of their life and how it must have been and if there were any other moments like that one?





http://nation.time.com/2013/02/21/drew-peterson-sentenced-to-38-years-for-murder/?iid=us-main-lead

    Drew Peterson on February 21, 2013 was sentenced to 38 years in prison for the murder of his third ex-wife. This case did not hit until October 2007 when his 4 wife, Stacey, disappeared. It was during the search for her when investigators looked into the death of Peterson's ex-wife more and in February 2008 ruled it to be a homicide. Peterson had since then been on trail for first-degree murder. Drew Peterson is a former police officer from Bolingbrook, Illinois he has publicly yelled in court he did not murder his ex-wife and has been said to be called by the prosecutor, "cold-blooded killer."

    You can't even see in the photo Peterson's eyes and he seems so cold and mean seems like he's mentally ill. You feel for his kids he has had with his past 4 wives and it makes you think of what they must think of their dad now being in prison for this heinous crime. Think of the boys he has with the ex-wife who is dead, what do they believe? Do they agree with the prosecution or not? His fellow police officers he worked with while he was on the force, how do they think of Drew now? Are some of them still loyal friends and standing behind him all the way?

    I have to step back and just look, look at everything in the past 4 years that has happened. This man has been on trail and in custody for 4 years and now he is convicted to 38 years in prison, which is good, but I ask, "Why now?" Why not convict 4 years ago when it seemed pretty clear that he was involved with his 4 wife's disappearance and pieces of evidence from the murder seemed clear and easy to solve. Noted he has been called by the Pastor of the church Peterson went to, "scary." People in the community and neighborhood he lived in have spoke out about Peterson and they're not good things to say.

    I have known about this case since it all came out and I haven't followed it continually and I didn't know he was due in court. When I saw this photo I knew who he was and thought, "Thank God it's over." It has been an interesting case to look at and to follow. I hope in the end the people that Drew Peterson was in and touched have been affected by this badly in anyway.





http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/02/pictures/130211-kumbh-mela-stampede-hindu-holy-festival-world-india/#/kumbh-mela-hindu-holy-festival-2013-aarti_64174_600x450.jpg

    This picture represents this year's Hindu Holy Festival in India. The festival lastes for 55 days and for each day the people do something to signifie Hinduisum. In this picture Hindu priests are performing a ceremony besides the Ganges River during the Kumbh Mela in Allahabad. Other events people have done are Holy Bath, bridge crossings to go and dip in the Ganges River, and lots of praying. Praying at the train station, in the streets, and at holy Hindu temples.

    In these photos you can see the faith the people have in this religion and there obeidence to it. Doing rituals and holding parties and festivals and the roads in local Indian cities have gotten so bad, stampedes have started. A women was trampled over and left for dead on the street when a local merchant in the city helped her to a hospital. The stampedes have killed 36 people in Allahabad.

    You can see the difference between the American culture and the Indian culture. It is so commen for people to celebrate Hinduism and to have a festival because everyone there or 95% of people living in India are Hindu. So this picture gives you a little look into the culture and how they celebrate their religion and it shows their dedication too.

    I ad heard and study in a class about Hinduism and how they celebrate it in India and when I saw this photo it was complete different from what I had thought in class studying it. The ceremony the preists are doing was something I had never seen or heard so I thought it was intersting and very wild almost. You would never see that here in Minnesota and so it is cool to flip through the pictures and look at the pictures of this festival.


  .