Hello,
I woke up this morning in Istanbul as I'm here for a conference and tried to post a Youtube video to my blog only discover youtube is blocked in Turkey. This is unfortunate.
However, my facebook is still accessibile and in the past I have found facebook invaluable in contacting sources and keeping in touch with contacts.
I think facebook has revolutionized the job of the journalists allowing us to get our work done around the globe.
I learned a lot in this course about maps and twitter and new forms of media. I appreciate this introduction to these skills and hope to master them.
Thank you,
Joseph Hammond
Friday, June 25, 2010
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Week 3 Assignment 3
Sometimes we need to see it all. The mayhem, the destruction, the lack of humanity, and yes even death to fully understand the complicated nature of the world's problems.
Without pictures of Nazi concentration camps, the mass graves at Srebrenica, or the almost neat stacks of skulls generated by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia we would have no way of knowing the scope of these tragedies. With out images, what does the death of 1.5 million Cambodians?, or 6 million Jews, or 9,000 Bosnians become but, numbers written on a paper. We must publish these images and because they disturb us.
As for U.S war dead it has been more or less government policy since World War I to censor pictures of U.S war dead. The U.S military has at various times either relaxed its policy on this issue. Images of the war dead where shown in WWII and the U.S military continued to relax its policy in Korea and in Vietnam.
During the war in Indochina, the U.S military felt that the media undercut support for the U.S presence with its coverage. During Grenada and the (First) Gulf War the U.S military tried to limit press access to the conflict zone in order to prevent this kind of unfavorable coverage. It is interesting to note that some of the most iconic images of the Vietnam are also very powerful and stay with anyone who has seen them. For example, the image of a young girl running from a napalm attack and a Buddhist priest engaged in self-immolation to protest the war come to mind. Also a photo of the Kent State shooting and of course photo of Nguyễn Ngọc Loan executing a Viet Cong prisoner both won Pulitzer Prizes despite showing death and violence.
These photos did more than just win prizes, they changed minds and opinions. Recently, while U.S newsrooms have become more careful about showing war dead, the Pulitzer Prize for photography has not completely shied away from this tradition. A 2005 Pulitzer Prize for photography went to an image of the bodies of American contractors hanging from a bridge in Falluja. Also Kevin Carter's 1994 photo of a starving Sudanese girl comes to mind as another controversial photo that won a Pulitzer prize.
We as journalists don't do what we do to win prizes or to become friends with those in charge of government censorship. We do what we do (in part) because we believe in the free flow of information and have faith in our readers to be adults.
We should keep this in mind when we do engage in self-censorship. I believe a lot can in some instances be gained from publishing these photos. As was gained ( I believe) by the publishing of the above photos I mentioned. I also believe and have previously mentioned in this course that online content by its very nature has more flexibility on this issue.
Without pictures of Nazi concentration camps, the mass graves at Srebrenica, or the almost neat stacks of skulls generated by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia we would have no way of knowing the scope of these tragedies. With out images, what does the death of 1.5 million Cambodians?, or 6 million Jews, or 9,000 Bosnians become but, numbers written on a paper. We must publish these images and because they disturb us.
As for U.S war dead it has been more or less government policy since World War I to censor pictures of U.S war dead. The U.S military has at various times either relaxed its policy on this issue. Images of the war dead where shown in WWII and the U.S military continued to relax its policy in Korea and in Vietnam.
During the war in Indochina, the U.S military felt that the media undercut support for the U.S presence with its coverage. During Grenada and the (First) Gulf War the U.S military tried to limit press access to the conflict zone in order to prevent this kind of unfavorable coverage. It is interesting to note that some of the most iconic images of the Vietnam are also very powerful and stay with anyone who has seen them. For example, the image of a young girl running from a napalm attack and a Buddhist priest engaged in self-immolation to protest the war come to mind. Also a photo of the Kent State shooting and of course photo of Nguyễn Ngọc Loan executing a Viet Cong prisoner both won Pulitzer Prizes despite showing death and violence.
These photos did more than just win prizes, they changed minds and opinions. Recently, while U.S newsrooms have become more careful about showing war dead, the Pulitzer Prize for photography has not completely shied away from this tradition. A 2005 Pulitzer Prize for photography went to an image of the bodies of American contractors hanging from a bridge in Falluja. Also Kevin Carter's 1994 photo of a starving Sudanese girl comes to mind as another controversial photo that won a Pulitzer prize.
We as journalists don't do what we do to win prizes or to become friends with those in charge of government censorship. We do what we do (in part) because we believe in the free flow of information and have faith in our readers to be adults.
We should keep this in mind when we do engage in self-censorship. I believe a lot can in some instances be gained from publishing these photos. As was gained ( I believe) by the publishing of the above photos I mentioned. I also believe and have previously mentioned in this course that online content by its very nature has more flexibility on this issue.
Week 3: Assignment 1...Modern Life in Turkey
Here is a video and also an image I might use in creating a multimedia story on life in Turkey. I want to focus on rural life in the East of Turkey and I want to show how things have changed in the context of increased globalization. I hope to show this to show the contrast between tradition and modernity. For example, the family business maintains old production methods while the children use the internet. This is very basic but, something like this is what I hope to ultimately produce.
As such I would use photos like this to tell a lot of my story. I want to focus on people and profile the lives they lead. A day-in-the-life kind of story is what I hope to produce. To show change over time I would like to use some historical images in the video in the way similar to the Turkish video below. I really want to get some good quality sound to mix and plan to bring a recorder for this purpose.
In particular I want to focus on life in Mardin and other villages like it in Southeastern Turkey because I don't speak Turkish. In Mardin I know there is a large Arabic speaking community and it is very ethnically diverse.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Week 2: Assignment 1
Eesti Energy signs major deal with Jordan: Lease to last 50 years
By Joseph Hammond
The historic agreement signed last month between Jordanian Prime Minster Samir Al-Rifaee and Estonian Prime Minster Andrus Ansip over the Wadi Attarat Um Ghudran oil shale deposit in Central Jordan. The signing caps four years of negotiations and formally mark Eesti Energy’s expansion into Jordanian oil shale and power production.
The project involves $6 billion dollars and commercial production is somewhere between 5 and 7 years away. Once the the Attarat site is operation, Tallin-based Eesti Energy plans to produce between 20-36,000 barrels of oil each day. The lease on the site will run for 44 years and leaves open the possibility of expansion to an additional 10 years.
Modern oil shale production in Estonia began over 90 years ago in 1916. Today, Estonia is one of (if not the) leader in the development of oil shale. Estonia develops 90% of its power from oil shale and 17% of all shale oil deposits in the European Union are in Estonia. In 2005, Estonia lead the world in Oil Shale production before subsequently be displaced by China.
Estonia operates two of largest oil shale fuelled power plants in the world in Estonian border city of Narva. In fact 90% of Estonia’s energy needs are met through oil shale and Estonia provides electricity to Finland and the rest of the Baltic states.
Estonia’s talent and depth in oil-shale production is matched by the size of Jordan’s significant oil shale deposits. Oil-shale has been discovered in 26 locations across the country and preliminary findings indicate that as much as 60% of the country may sit on oil shale. Like Estonia, Jordan first modern oil shale was conducted during the tumultuous events of World War I, when the Imperial German Army began production on a site near Yarmouk in Northern Jordan to support the Hejaz Railway.
Currently, Jordan is desperate to become more energy independent. Jordan imports 97 percent of its energy needs. Jordan hopes to get 11 percent of its energy from domestic sources by 2015 and a further 14 percent by 2020. Jordan is one of several Middle Eastern countries looking to develop shale oil in the near future. Others include Morocco and Israel.
1) First link is a link to Estonia's Eesti Energy company. While the site is in Estonian translation is readily available and I think its an important link for people who want to lean more about this important company
2) Second Link: A great report about oil shale in Estonia and its importance. Information supports assertation that Estonia is an innovator in oil shale.
3) Third Link: A link to my source of information about the meeting with King Abdullah from the Jordan Times. A source I know to reputable when I was a member of the press corp. in Amman.
The formalities of informality (Week 2 Exercise 2)
Discussion: Should news on the Web be less formal in tone than news on air or in newspapers? Why or why not?
In general, if news content on the web once to be taken seriously it should use formal language. I noticed from looking over other peoples assignments that most members of this class used very formal language in their blog posts! I do believe as journalists in general we should use a formal voice and tone when reporting hard news.
If it is the semi-serious kind of news (man-bites-dog as someone mentioned ) or a cultural story where an informal tone would be acceptable than I believe this is more than acceptable. Still if the goal is to be taken serious as a news provider I believe web-journalism should where ever applicable hold themselves to the standards of print and broadcast journalism in this regard.
In general, if news content on the web once to be taken seriously it should use formal language. I noticed from looking over other peoples assignments that most members of this class used very formal language in their blog posts! I do believe as journalists in general we should use a formal voice and tone when reporting hard news.
If it is the semi-serious kind of news (man-bites-dog as someone mentioned ) or a cultural story where an informal tone would be acceptable than I believe this is more than acceptable. Still if the goal is to be taken serious as a news provider I believe web-journalism should where ever applicable hold themselves to the standards of print and broadcast journalism in this regard.
Culture Matters Week 2 Exercise 3
Hello,
I think the cultural context should be a big determinant in deciding what we should be posting.
on our news sites. Who our are readers? What are the traditions within those countries in portraying violence? As journalists we have a duty to our readers to be sensitive to the cultural context of our readership. We also must keep in mind that these norms are constantly changing.
In 2005, I got the opportunity to experience coverage of Hurricane Katrina in the U.S and Spain. The Spanish media had no problem showing floating bodies in the streets of New Orleans and other casualties while these images are never shown in the U.S media.
Secondly, in my travels elsewhere I have noticed a strong difference to coverage of warfare. The Western media is hesitant resistant to showing civilian casualties in warfare and rarely shows enemy causalities as well. The possible exceptions are in mass-killings like those in Rwanda or at Srebrenica, which received extensive coverage in the international media and reports routinely included shocking images of the mass graves.
Conversely, in many countries images of those mourning their loved ones is usually muted. While in the United States in particular such images can become iconic. Consider this image of a woman grieving over the loss of her son. In many places including images like this in your story can be considered "too personal" or off limits. At the same time images like this( and other disturbing ones) can have a strong effect on readers and the views of policy-makers.
This is just one example but, I believe the differences are stark. It as if we are often watching two different wars on our news screens. Sometimes, with the Cartoon example or the beheading I think we can get away with just describing the offensive content using neutral language. Still it is important to realize any kind of censorship is dangerous. We should be very careful with the self-censorship we engage in. I do think disclaimers should be put up on news sites that may use explicit material to warn our readers. We should trust our readers as adults to make the choice of what content they want to be exposed too.
I think the cultural context should be a big determinant in deciding what we should be posting.
on our news sites. Who our are readers? What are the traditions within those countries in portraying violence? As journalists we have a duty to our readers to be sensitive to the cultural context of our readership. We also must keep in mind that these norms are constantly changing.
In 2005, I got the opportunity to experience coverage of Hurricane Katrina in the U.S and Spain. The Spanish media had no problem showing floating bodies in the streets of New Orleans and other casualties while these images are never shown in the U.S media.
Secondly, in my travels elsewhere I have noticed a strong difference to coverage of warfare. The Western media is hesitant resistant to showing civilian casualties in warfare and rarely shows enemy causalities as well. The possible exceptions are in mass-killings like those in Rwanda or at Srebrenica, which received extensive coverage in the international media and reports routinely included shocking images of the mass graves.
Conversely, in many countries images of those mourning their loved ones is usually muted. While in the United States in particular such images can become iconic. Consider this image of a woman grieving over the loss of her son. In many places including images like this in your story can be considered "too personal" or off limits. At the same time images like this( and other disturbing ones) can have a strong effect on readers and the views of policy-makers.
This is just one example but, I believe the differences are stark. It as if we are often watching two different wars on our news screens. Sometimes, with the Cartoon example or the beheading I think we can get away with just describing the offensive content using neutral language. Still it is important to realize any kind of censorship is dangerous. We should be very careful with the self-censorship we engage in. I do think disclaimers should be put up on news sites that may use explicit material to warn our readers. We should trust our readers as adults to make the choice of what content they want to be exposed too.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Final assignment for Week 1
I have been following the debate on this question and I have found a lot of arguments convincing. My own views are that we as the writers of these blogs and decide how much to share and what opinions to give depending on the tone of our blog. Perhaps as in life we should use more digression with our opinions depending on the topic. If you have a food blog and didn't include strong opinions on the foods you were eat, let's say I can honestly say that I would stop reading it.
While many have noted we should be careful sharing more information the simple Name, Location, Education, etc. I think a strong case can be made for even further disclosure in some instances. I think that some of the most successful bloggers have been far more open about themselves and there lives. Take the case of Megan McCardale of Atlantic Monthly. She is one of the more famous economics and finance bloggers in the U.S, who started out blogging anonymously and then grew comfortable enough with the medium to start blogging more openly to the extent that she even announced her engagement on her blog.
Again though I'd like to return to the question of opinion. Don't be too afraid to show your opinion in your blog. Blogs were invented in the first place for people to share opinions! In fact we live in a world were information is (no offense) cheap. I can (and do) go online all the time to learn about the politics and affairs of many countries around the globe. However, finding informed comment is something more rare. I think the future of opinion of journalism is to some extent...opinion journalism. We will be counted on to give informed opinions on a variety of topics.
In these instances I believe the general public would much rather prefer someone who openly stated their biases than trying to mask these on their blogs.
Just my thoughts.
While many have noted we should be careful sharing more information the simple Name, Location, Education, etc. I think a strong case can be made for even further disclosure in some instances. I think that some of the most successful bloggers have been far more open about themselves and there lives. Take the case of Megan McCardale of Atlantic Monthly. She is one of the more famous economics and finance bloggers in the U.S, who started out blogging anonymously and then grew comfortable enough with the medium to start blogging more openly to the extent that she even announced her engagement on her blog.
Again though I'd like to return to the question of opinion. Don't be too afraid to show your opinion in your blog. Blogs were invented in the first place for people to share opinions! In fact we live in a world were information is (no offense) cheap. I can (and do) go online all the time to learn about the politics and affairs of many countries around the globe. However, finding informed comment is something more rare. I think the future of opinion of journalism is to some extent...opinion journalism. We will be counted on to give informed opinions on a variety of topics.
In these instances I believe the general public would much rather prefer someone who openly stated their biases than trying to mask these on their blogs.
Just my thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
