It Matters Now!

"Getting paid for stuff that you do, rocks!"

Wise words Steve Molks, internet blogger of MolksTvTalk. Well, obviously we all agree, but when you're in the blogging world being paid isn't always expected. Stever Molks has been in the blogging world for two years and is just recently being picked up by various papers to pay him for his work. Impressive stuff, Mr Molks.

Something Steve kept installing into our brains was the importance of what we are doing right now. It matters. Our prospective employers want to see what we can do, and what we have done to do it. (Weird wording there) What I'm trying to say is - yes, we will finish with a degree, but what does that really show? Does it show we love light news and quirky columns, or down into the dirt investigative journalism?

Steve told us to write within our interests. When we are able to connect to something, our passion for writing ignites and that where the real fire burns. I know how easy it is to sit here and blog about what I've learnt in the lectures. Why? Well for one, journalism is my interest. But I am able to relate myself and my experiences with the content. I think we can all agree that it's much easier to write about something we like than an essay about something we barely understand.

I loved hearing the passion within Steve Molks. Who wouldn't love to watch television all day and write about it? Obviously, we couldn't all do it in a way that would attract buyers. I would have way too much fun with the investigating instead of doing the theory.

Steve completely changed careers during a mid-life crisis. It makes me wonder what my true interests will be in ten years time. Will I still be a commercial media addict, and love reading gossip magazines? Will I have finally changed my ninemsn homepage to something more handy? I would like to think yes - since I'll be sooo busy researching for my stories!

No one can predict what is going to happen, but I know right now this is what I love.

Signing off for possibly the last time! Who knows, maybe I'll come back on here from time to time. Like Steve says, what I do right now counts.

Until next time.

Hide and Seek

Disguising wig? Check.

Shady glasses? Check.

Dark trenchcoat? Check.

It's time to investigate.

HA. Yeah right. I obviously mixed up investigative journalism with movie star detectives. I really did think we would have a touch of mystery though. How wrong was I...

There are the 4 "IN"s when it comes investigating:

Intelligent

• must be well thought out

Informed

• facts, people involved, who is pulling strings

Intuitive

• rely on your gut

Invest

• a lot of yourself - money, time, mental health

I must admit, even though talk of investigating was nowhere near as cut throat as I imagined, it's pretty exciting to think I could investigate something. Imagine being the first person to discover something - cracking a case! Okay, now I'm thinking of detectives again...

I could not agree more with the quote from Lord Northcliffe - "...what somebody somewhere wants to suppress, the rest is just advertising."

Yes! For someone to really care about our story, we need to discover something the company/celebrity/friend is throwing at us. We all hear the same facts on each news channel each night - it's the shows dedicated to bringing new stories and questionable conclusions which really capture our attention.

Everybody must be hiding something. It is our jobs as journalists to find out what it is! Ahh, I can just imagine my shady dark raybans now, my brunette wig disguising my blonde locks...

Until next time.

Today's Agenda

Wow, the lecture on Agenda Setting was a lot to take in. I think if I touched on everything I learnt, I would be here for a very long time.

Ah, quoting the wise words of Redman. I do agree, though. Although the lecture was jam-packed of bits and pieces which all combine to create agenda setting, the theory is quite obvious.

The media plays a large role in 'construcing' or 'mediating' the social world.

NO WAY??!!

Yeah, exactly. However, we covered the different ways it does.

There are 4 agendas. These are

1. Public Agenda - topics percieved by the public as important
2. Policy Agenda - issues decision makers think are salient
3. Corporate Agenda - issues big business and corporations consider important
4. Media Agenda - issues discussed in the media

Obviously, public agenda is my type. I guess that's why the media spends so much time covering celebrities. It's obvious gossip magazines are what this is for (cannot waittt to read the Cosmo I bought today) but news, really? I like to switch on the news, ready to stimulate my brain cells full of new facts I can mention to people the next day and look so totally with-it. So I become very shocked when I see PARIS HILTON arriving in Australia all over the news. I love celebrity gossip just as much as the next person, but let's face it - Paris Hilton doesn't deserve my stimulating brain cells.

But, if Paris Hilton strutting her stuff through the Sydney Airport is what the viewers what, it's what they'll get.

“Agenda setting is the process of the mass media presenting certain issues frequently and prominently with the result that large segments of the public come to perceive those issues as more important than others. Simply put, the more coverage an issue receives, the more important it is to people.” Coleman, McCombs, Shaw, Weaver, I couldn't have said it better myself. The amount of times I have heard something and let it pass straight over me, to then find myself chatting about the new updates I heard today, are never-ending.

And this is with filtered news. Can you imagine if we were told every single thing that was perceived as interesting? I definitely could not keep up with that.

Until next time.

YAY - I got something right

One quote from the news values lecture stood out to me for all the right reasons.

This is the quote by Julia Hossbawn. You see, I do a dual degree of Journalism and Communication, majoring in Public Relations. Many people question this - "Don't journalists and public relations HATE each other?"

When people ask me why I've chosen to do both, or how they connect, I'm never really sure how to answer. To be honest, when I chose PR as my major I wasn't even completely sure what it was. But, on my very first PR assignment, I chose to analyse an article written about the relationship between journalists and public relations. AND, would you believe it, I came to the same conclusions as Julia Hobsbawn!

#happylittlevegemite

Yes, I realise she is a PR executive, but it proves to myself I am actually on some sort of track (and am beginning to understand public relations, phew).

I know that journos and PR will always be in a competitive market, and obviously I can't be both. But I'm really enjoying the differences in them yet how they are so connected - even if it's not really for the right reasons.

It was such a thrill knowing someone worth quoting had the same ideas as me!

What do you value most?

This week we talked about news values. Although I was aware of such values through touching on them in all of my subjects, never had I learnt about them in so much detail.

Basically, news is:
"Anything that's intersting, that relates to what's happening in the world, in areas of the culture that would be of interest to your audience." -Kurt Loder

I think that sentence pretty much sums up news values and what is worthy enough to become news. But, just in case you disagree, here's the long version.

Newsworthiness - The 12+ Factors

• Negativity - bad news, death, tragedy
• Proximity - how meaningul a story is to the audience
• Recency - stories as they happen
• Currency - stories that have been around for a while and still seem valuable. Eg: Abductions remain high rating stories on the news as the story is not concluded until the abducted is found alive/deceased/releases a media release - whatever captures the attention
• Continuity - something to make the viewers tune in tomorrow
• Uniqueness - a two-headed elephant - often lighter, out of the oridnary news
• Simplicity - easy to explain
• Personality - human interest, often found doing celebrity stories
• Predictability - containing conceived ideas of those covering the story
• Elite Nations/People - importance
• Exclusivity - many stations thrive on "you heard it here first"
• Size - the bigger impact the better

Of course, this is only one perception of newsworthiness. In my other classes there was similarities and differences, and like mentioned in the lecture, different people hold other values. When I really think about it, I can not name one piece of news I have heard recently that doesn't contain one or more of those values.

Browsing ninemsn, (yes, I know, I haven't set Google as my home page...don't start) I found myself clicking onto the link about The Bachelor. Now, refrain from clicking out of me as I explain newsworthiness through The Bachelor. Trust me, I realise this isn't news... Or is it? It was on the ninemsn homepage, and it is entertainment. Even The Bachelor holds certain news values:

• Recency - the sites tell us what is happening in the episodes, as they happen
• Continuity - OF COURSE we want to tune in tomorrow to see if the unhappy couple can patch things up!!
• Simplicity - boy chooses girl, boy regrets choosing girl, girl wants to work it out
• Personality - I suppose you could call them passing reality "stars"

My point is, it is simple to make almost any story newsworthy. Just because we won't all find it interesting, the story appeals to the target group using chosen values. I didn't realise how many news values there were, and how different companies respect different values. I guess I shouldn't get too attached; through different careers who knows which ones I will need to value most. Hopefully they are something to do with The Bachelor - I think I could do continuity well - I must admit I did watch the final episode!

Until next time.

Annotated Bibliography

Communication surrounds us constantly, and we often don’t take notice as it part of our everyday life. With monotonous television advertisements, advertisers need something that will capture the audience’s attention. This annotated bibliography will analyse celebrity endorsement, using three mediums of an online column, news article and blog, surrounding an online journal.

The authors of the European Journal of Marketing are Amanda Spry, Ravi Pappu and T. Battina Cornwall. All are associated with universities in Melbourne, Australia, Brisbane, Australia, or Michigan, America. With university connections to their name, the labels are considered high-class and their credibility is already solid. The journal researches impact of celebrity endorsement of a product and how the credibility of a celebrity can have an effect. Research found “endorser credibility has an indirect impact on brand equity,” (Spry, Pappu, Cornwell, 2011) and the piece continues to explain how this research was performed. This is where celebrity endorsement seems to pay off, as “even a moderately low credibility endorser proved to be able to build the brand.” (Spry, Pappu, Cornwell, 2011) In explaining what was done to find results, the authors were quite specific about the process. This is to ensure the audience can follow exactly how the information was gathered, and to trust that the findings have a backbone. Analysed below are three different pieces also relating to celebrity endorsement. All pieces are attempting to evaluate endorsement within advertising, with some more credible than others.

Chris Philpott, author of Celebrity Endorsements: Do They Work?, is a regular blogger from New Zealand. Although himself he does not hold much credibility, he has done his research and has statistics and quotes from people with high reputations. Philpott refers to Brian Edwards, whose company “teaches people how to interact with the media and manage their public persona.” (Philpott, 2012) He quotes “Brian’s Law of Endorsement means that the less you have to lose in terms of reputation, the less you will lose.” (Philpott, 2012) This is explaining how the more famous a celebrity, the less likely they will be to endorse a product. Celebrities are offered more money the more their face is worth, which is discussed in Rahul Parikh’s blog. Philpott refers to two studies, conducted by Ace Matrix and Journal of Advertising Research, who both hold high ethos and any type of formal research makes a credible point. With evolving media and news outlets, bloggers are now considered a worthy source when news is breaking. They are often the majority of sites that appear when a situation is typed into Google. Able to access news everywhere, bloggers can combine information to create a worthy news source.

Rahul Parikh, author of Proactiv’s Celebrity Shell Game, is a weekly online columnist, focusing mainly on health. The reason celebrity endorsement has been recognised is the use of it within Proactiv advertisements. “It’s annual sales, $1.5 billion tower over the rest of the acne treatment industry.” (Parikh, 2011) With Proactiv winning in the skincare range, it introduces the point of celebrities as a positive promotion. Parikh refers to published author Robert Cialdini’s principles, in particular “how easy it is for someone we don’t know but think we like – a celebrity for example” (Parikh, 2012) to influence an audience. This seems to pay off, with Justin Bieber “getting paid $3 million for two years.” (Parikh, 2012) Using dollar amounts, Parikh is cementing his theory of how celebrity endorsement pays high, both in the bank and out. An article from Brisbane Times suggests witnessing companies like Proactiv cash in with celebrities, other companies may begin to do the same.

Julianne Dowling’s article, The Power of Celebrity Endorsement, similarly addresses the cost of a famous endorsement. The Brisbane Times is a highly respected news source and prides itself on reporting the facts. With new media replacing traditional media, in particular newspapers, Brisbane Times use an internet site to manage the news. The mentioned author may not have had high credibility alone, but publishing with Brisbane Times creates much higher credibility. However, this piece isn’t much of a hard hitting story, proving how newsworthiness has evolved. This article was created because the public has a curiosity and Brisbane Times could help that. Public interest is a key factor for what is published – after all, the audience will not read it if they don’t care. Although this is mainly a human interest article, research was still done to make the point credible. Half of the article is full of quotes of credible people in the field of celebrities. The article ends with a “Pros and Cons of Celebrity Endorsements” (Dowling, 2009) list, possibly to ensure there is no bias message being taken and to prove Dowling can see both sides of the issue.

It is obvious celebrity endorsement creates a buzz for any business. The audience the products want are generally interest in celebrities and although we may not buy the product immediately, it holds more significance because a celebrity has been involved. A topic that is quite light-hearted is still in the news, and Chris Philpott, Rahul Parikh, and Julianne Dowling have all analysed this with both opinions and facts from people who are highly credible. While all articles follow the European Journal of Marketing piece, the academic journal carries the highest credibility with the authors doing their own primary research. That’s what good journalism is – digging deep so you have original breaking news.

Reference List

Dowling, J., (2009) The Power of Celebrity Endorsement. Retrieved from http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/executive-style/management/the-power-of-celebrity-endorsement-20091216-kvsl.html

Parikh, R., (2011). Proactiv’s Celebrity Shell Game. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/2011/02/28/proactiv_celebrity_sham/

Philpott, C. (2012, March 26) Celebrity endorsements: do they work? Retrieved from http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/blogs/on-the-box/6635277/Celebrity-endorsements-do-they-work

Spry, A., Pappu, R., Cornwell, T. B., (2011) Celebrity Endorsement, Brand Credibility, and Brand Equity, 45, 882-909. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/journals.htm?articleid=1926001&show=html

Bad Ethics..or Just Tacky?

This week we learnt all about ethics - the good, the bad, and the ugly.

It came as quite a surprise to me that there's more to ethics than just right and wrong. Something can be ethical, but just made with bad taste. It seems there's a fine line between unethical and bad taste. We were shown a series of advertisements during the lecture, and asked where we thought each belonged in the table of good taste, ethical, bad taste, and unethical. Most images I guessed were unethical. However, they were actually considered purely bad taste.

After we were given explanations of ways to tell, I began to understand how to spot the difference.

In the world of communication we follow Deontology. This is the rules, principles, and duties.

Basically, we do the right thing by following the rules.

When it is put into one straight forward sentence, it is pretty easy to understand. Ethics, just like anything else, has a code of rules. Here are just a few:

• MEAA
• PRIA
• AFA
• AANA

The following is an advertisement we were asked to analyse during the lecture. I won't tell you which category it falls into: what do you think?

My Story

Public Media

I couldn't think of an original title for the subject of Public Media, because, frankly, I don't know much about it. Apparently ABC and SBS are the main contenders in the game.

Public media presents its news style as:

• serious
• broadsheet - not tabloid
• importance over interest
• considered

Public Media is often perceived as:

• boring
• out of touch
• poorly presented

As mentioned in my previous post, I have more interest within commercial media. So, I will admit I do hold the same perception of public media. However, I was surprised when I saw the values public media holds. There was one main value which stood out to me

encouraging competion = good programming, not good numbers

I believe this is the most important value a station should have. It seems these days many commercial channels only worry about how many viewers they can attract: if one reality TV show works, why not bring along another 4 from America? This is not good programming, it is not original, and it is not going to work forever.

Although I don't associate much with public media, I do appreciate the extra work they have to put into their stations. The Australian Government funds commercial media, but disencourage public media. Yes, they do have their reasons, but this is a democratic country and we have freedom of speech, right? Therefore every angle of presenting (within reason, of course) should be appreciated.

The lack of funds causes the ABC to charge documentaries for segments from their channel. When I first heard the ABC charged $75 a SECOND, I was completely shocked. However, I then realised this is how they gain any money to then fund more television.

I will probably never follow public media, though I'm really happy I now have an understanding of how the two types of media work. Just because I'm not a fan of the entertainment, I definitely respect the hard yards they put in without the free ride of handouts.

Money Money Money

Wow, week 6 was definitely the most notes I'd ever taken down for JOUR1111.

I never thought there was so much detail between different television networks, and how damn rich the people are who own SO MUCH.

The main focus of this week's lecture, to me, was Commercial Media. I guess I'd always thought this covered all television networks, but now as we delve deep into it I'm realising whenever I watch ABC3 (yes, I am 18...) there are no actual paid commercials.

Commercial Media is channels 7, 9, 10 and all their digital channels inbetween. You realise how much advertising is involved in television when you buy the box set of a series and the usual hour long show is only 40 minutes without advertising. It is, afterall, the advertisers who pay to keep these show running.

Basically, the more popular a show, the more money is paid for an ad slot. I remember hearing ridiculous figures companies would pay for televised time during the Superbowl, and wondering if paying that amount of money would really pay off.

Admittedly, I do fall under the category of people who mainly follow Commercial Media. I am part of the group Network Ten focussed on the gain viewers: I used to be a dedicated follower of Big Brother and Australian Idol. And, just like I am following the ratings, I now find most of the television I watch is on Channel 7. I'm not entirely sure there is an intelligent reason for this, I just enjoy most of the programs it shows.

I do understand why advertisers would want to market their projects through the most popular broadcasters, but I'm not sold on how well it would work. I rarely pay attention to advertisements and am often day dreaming during the breaks.

I watch for the program not the advertising, but I guess the two really work hand-in-hand.

Until next time.

Listen Closely

What was that? I am allowed to listen to the lecture from the comfort of my own bed this week? SCORE!

The Sound lecture of week 5 was a really different experience. Sure, we've all listened to lectures online, but just hearing voices with no visual was definitely a first for me. I really felt like I was listening to a local radio.

I will admit, I've never been a huge fan of talkback radio myself. I once worked for a business that had ............ - it was that uninteresting I can not even remember the station - blaring from the speakers. Every morning I would turn up half asleep to listen to a man and his callers discuss recent events. However, I did occasionally find myself wanting to voice my opinion about the matters. And I guess that's what they were after; the public calling up to say what they think. Even though I wasn't a fan of the station, I still found myself wanting to become involved.

An interesting point I picked up from Richard (I feel as though we could be on first name basis as the lecture sounded quite intimiate, like a radio piece) was the need to take a different approach. Too many times I have heard the same celebrities tell the exact same story. Like when Kim Kardashian visited Australia whilst in the gut of her divorce. Each interviewer asked the same questions, and Kim had a monotonous, rehearsed answer to each one. No one took a different angle, no one surprised her.

I was recently listening to the Kyle and Jackie O Show while they interviewed Brian McFadden. From the beginning they were asking questions completely out of the box. One question was about social media and ended with Brian having a big rant about Facebook and Twitter and he seemed to be really out of his shell. It is the only recent interview I can recall that really caught my attention, and this is because it was a side of Brian I hadn't heard before.

Although I don't think I will ever love talkback radio, I can appreciate where good radio work lies.

Until next time.

Media Use Diary

We all rely on media within our lives. We may not realise how much, or how little we use compared to other people in society. I have logged my media usage over a period of ten days, and was quite surprised at my limited media usage compared to what is available in the world of technology.

Below is a table of my media usage over a period of ten days (in minutes):

<><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><> <><><><><><>

Media	Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4	Day 5	Day 6	Day 7	Day 8	Day 9	Day 10
Facebook	45	15	30	45	60	60	120	120	30	60
Twitter	20	20	-	-	-	-	20	-	-	30
Blogging	15	60	-	40	-	-	20	-	-	30
Emailing	-	-	-	-	15	-	-	-	15	15
Online News	-	30	-	20	-	60	30	20	45	-
TV News	30	30	30	30	-	30	-	60	60	-

This table illustrates my media usage can be divided into three main categories.

1.       Social Media – Facebook, Twitter, Blogging, Email

2.       Online news

3.       TV news

Media Usage Groups Over 10 Day Period

(x = days, y = minutes)

It is obvious most of my usage lies within social media. Although I was aware of this before I logged, I did not notice the considerable difference. This is primarily because of ‘new’ media. With new media we are able to access news through almost any media outlet. As I am not from Brisbane, I often use Facebook to keep track of events occurring in my home town. It may not be the most detailed news, but it is available to me when I need it.

In a recent survey of 436 university students, it is clear a large amount of their media usage also lies within social media. The following shows social media split up into separate elements.

JOUR 1111 Survey – Social Media

The graph shows Facebook is the very prominent winner when it comes to media usage. 91.9% of students spend most of their internet time on Facebook. New media has a definite role in this. A huge 78.2% of students own a smart phone and 95.4% use Facebook as an app. This means Facebook can be accessed on the go at any time. I spend more time using the app than on my laptop, as I am usually on it when I am not home. This links with what I earlier mentioned, with Facebook also being a news tool for easy access.

It is interesting to note only 10% of students used Twitter. This was before we were required to join for our assessment. Although I never used Twitter before, I now check it almost daily. I would guarantee many other students would do the same. I often now use Twitter for news updates: news groups like Brisbane Times and Courier Mail have constant, quick news updates keeping me informed.

My media usage is not vast, but that may be because I have not been introduced to many media outlets. If I had not been required to join Twitter I probably never would have; now I realise what a convenience it is to have for updates. Although my main media use is social networking, new media provides a strong use of journalism and communication within all networks.