1. Do broadcasters use radio and television to quickly and effectively respond to the local communities needs and interests? Give examples to support your answer.

I do not think that broadcasters use radio and television to effectively respond to needs and interests. In my opinion, they are more concerned about ratings and making money. Large media corporations seem to desire to acquire as many stations as possible to expand their influence and business profits as much as possible. I think they are more interested in deleivering their own policies to the public instead of reflecting the people they claim to represent. It is a rare find to see a station that does not have to answer to the conglomerate that owns them. Look at the Clear Channel communications hearing discussed on pgs. 23-25. This company previously owned 1200 stations and were staunch Bush supporters. They benefitted greatly from the policies of Michael Powell. When you read the speech by TC Calvert on pg. 25, it is plain that Clear Communication did not have the public's interests in mind.

2. Are there certain kinds of local programming (Public Media Values) that should be available, but are not being provided by broadcasters? what could some examples of these be?

I think it is the job of local rpogramming to inform its citizens of what is happening in their area as soon as possible, much like Clear communication failed to do in the San Antonio example above. They need to become a positive, informative source of information. We should be able to use local news to warn us of dangers, crimes, etc... that are happening where we live. I think the emerging technology of "smart radios" as defined on page 33 would be a great aid. Opening up airwaves so that medis is not so limited and implementing fair licensing techiniques for this new technology sounds like a great solution.

3. What could the Federal Communication Commission do to promote localism in broadcasting? Explain three of these examples of public-service-oriented projects that are already in process across the US.

UTOPIA- If they raise the money, Utah would deploy to homes and business fiber-optic cables capable of of delivering data at speeds one hundred times faster than the current cables. The focus here is faster, more relaible access.

Public Interest Wireless Providers- utilising public airwaves to provide high speed access via a shared unlicensed spectrum. They offer low cost connections to rural areas and offers opportunities for universal broadband services. I loke this because I live oue in a rural area that currently does not offer wireless. It is so hard for us to get information right now.

LPFM (Low-powered FM Radio)- Constructed at a rapid clip, providing a unique community medium. these have been some of the greates success stories. I have worked for one of these station in high school and admire them as well. these station are totaslly dependant on listeners and local businesses and offer the best local support in my experience. The station I worked for was WAY FM in Grand Rapids Michigan. They are able to currently be totally commercial free.

extras:What Stanford professor and lawyer that we have discussed before is mentioned in this essay?
What organization is he the founder of?
What is the "spectrum" that the authors refer to?

Campaign Debate and the struggle for a free press

This clip from the debate shows the what I think is the negative influence of media on elections. I noticed when watching the clip that neither cadidate seemed to really touch on the issues. They were more interested in mudslinging their opponent for their audience. The purpose of a debate is so that we can see a candidate in action, defending their policy with no media bias. The article from the future of media states that many media mediums reflect the interests of the people who run them. I wholeheartedly agree with his statements. I can see this especially in television news and in newspapers. It is hard to stay completely objective without being influenced by those above yet I do not think this is fair. A professional journalist should not have to color the truth because it does not serve the interest of the media establishment in which they are employed. The presidental candidated have a huge opportunity to have their say without any influence from a biased media whatsoever yet I felt that neither candidate took this opportunity. I would like to see less finger-pointing and be told straight from the source what each candidate want to do without a media bias coming from the journalists themselves and the large conglomerates they work for.

Trials of the Public amateur

When looking in the context of the time that this took place, I understand why this happened. I also think that the government was marginally justified in what they did. I do not agree with the reactionary measure that were taken but Kurtz and Ferrell did break the law, no matter what context or what reason they had. Our country was almost in shambles after 9/11 and the whole situation was completely overblown by the FBI. I cannot imagine being treated like that by the people we pay to protect us, especially in the aftermath of losing your wife unexpectedly. They should have seen the obvious instead of freaking out. I believe in artistic expression and the publics right to knowledge as much as the next person but we cannot cross the boundaries laid out for us by the government. We all need to be held to the same standards otherwise, the law becomes useless to us. This was a very complicated situation.

Quiz Over the Cult of the Amateur

Quiz comments

1984: Web 2.0 Style vs. the shopaholic

My mom does a lot of online shopping and at some point over the last year she created a profile on google checkout. a month ago, she went to make a purchase at one of her favorite stores that uses google checkout and found that both her credit and debit cards she has used online had been automatically saved to her profile. She also uses my google and if you sign in, all your google checkout information is accessible. This would not be a problem if it automatically logged out when you close the browser but it doesn't. We also found out that this information is accessible to anyone that uses the computer if you forget to logout of mygoogle by accident. She has periodically used my computer to shop so I unknowingly have her credit card numbers. i went to amazon.com and ordered a book for class and when I went to checkout, her numbers were there on display. This is scary to know that all of this information can be so easily accessed. I do not really know how this service works but my parents freaked out. Anyone could have gotten a hold of this information. I do not trust online shopping and never do it unless forced. Can you imagine the damage that could have been done if this had fallen into the wrong hands? This definitely makes me think it's worth the gas money to just drive to the mall.

I agree with Keen about the dangers of using the Internet. I never put anything online that I do not to be publicly known about myself.

i report vs. CNN

The top stories for today reveal the real contrast between i report and the official CNN website. On CNN, the highlight is the economic crisis and congress and on i-report, the top story was about the new format of facebook. The stories on i-report are more trivial and superficial. The top daily stories on CNN included information from the campaign trail, world affairs and the war while i-report talks about gas prices in Atlanta and dogs. The user-based i-report is obviously not an official news source. The stories seen in i-report were also more locally based and focused on special interests. This sight seems to show how the definition of news is being revolutionized. What is news and what is newsworthy? It looks like anything is up for grabs here.

Look at these highlights from the facebook article:
Facebook's makeover is sparking an outcry among many of its 100 million users
Facebook unveiled its face-lift in July but forced users to new site only two weeks ago
One online petition against the new Facebook has more than 1.5 million names
Others praise the new site as being better organized, easier to navigate

When did a user-based website become worthy news? Is this the future of news? Many people seem more interested in trivial matters like this than cold, hard news.

The Uncovered Truth

Instead of searching for a specific truth on the net I decided to share my personal experience with an uncovered truth. During my freshman year of college at another University, someone broke into a dorm room and set it on fire using a can of harispray. At first, college officials blamed the two boys who owned the room. There was no evidence of an initial break in and it was basically their word against the fore marshall's. If anyone is unfamiliar with setting fire to dorm's, this type of arson is considered a felony and has serious consequences including a hefty amount of jail time. The investigation went on for a few weeks before the whole incident showed up in a u-tube video turned in by an anonymous student. The culprits had videotaped themselves setting the dorm room on fire and uploaded it there. Their faces we hidden but the police were able to use clothing and other clues from the home movie to find the real offenders. How stupid was that? They were so confidant they were not going to get caught that they uploaded their video for thousands to see. I tried to find the video but it has since been removed. This leads me to point out that police have now been searching the internet more and more for criminal evidence. Is this ethical? Should police be able to use u-tube videos as evidence? I think so. The internet is free game for everyone. The largest problem of using evidence gathered on-line is finding its validity. As we have discussed time and time again in class, because of the universal nature of web 2.0, it makes it harder and harder to find truth and to find trustworthy sources.