Journalism Today and How We Got Here

Journalism today is much different from what it was not too long ago. I would say that journalism used to be defined as a hired writer writing a news article or report for a printed publication. The old definition could have also applied to TV news, but I feel as if it mostly applied to newspapers. Things have definitely changed over the years though because the definition is so much broader now than it was back then and it encompasses so much more.

I would now define journalism as someone who reports on the news and spreads it to others. This is done professionally, but it may not be someone's profession. This means that it could simply be a person with a blog who reports on the news. They may not be getting paid, but they are still being professional and reliable. I think a journalist nowadays is any person who reports the news while still following a journalistic code of ethics.

I think the best part of this is that there are so many different ways for people to do this. They can be a blogger, use Twitter, have a YouTube channel, write for an online newspaper/magazine, write for a print newspaper/magazine, be part of a TV news station, or so many other options. Also, anyone can do this. You can be a professional who's been doing it for years, you can be just starting out, or you could still be a student. As long as you have professional and reliable reporting, I think anyone can do it if they want to.

I think that we've been able to get to this point mainly because of the Internet. People have realized that they can reach out to others through the web and social media, and it's working. Anyone can start their own website or blog and grow it into something huge. You don't have to wait to be hired by a newspaper anymore. You can start working for yourself. On the one hand, this is kind of scary because it's taking away from the newspaper industry, but at the same time it's reassuring to know that I can make it on my own if I put in the effort.

Ten Ideas to Save Journalism

1. For bigger stories, run the main story and then have readers' stories run along side of it as a way to show different perspectives. People will enjoy reading about more personal experiences and the writers of these shorter articles will like to see their name in the paper.
2. I know some newspapers already do this, but some don't, but papers should make it so that to access the website you need a subscription. Readers could have the option of buying the paper subscription, the digital subscription, or a combo deal where you get both.
3. Instead of having the paper be online, just do the paper version and then make a website that's an online community to complement the paper. People could discuss articles and issues and even submit ideas of their own. It would make a nice discussion to go along with what people are reading. Writers and reporters of the paper could even talk back to the readers on the site.
4. Make the website have a lot of multimedia so that once people read the article in the paper, they can check out more online. Then they'll want to read the paper so they know what's going on and then they can follow up with extra stuff on the website. The whole story wouldn't be available online though.
5. It might be interesting to make a newspaper have more of a magazine feel. It could have more graphics and pictures and cool design layouts. A lot of papers look the same but if one had a different feel to it, then people would want to check it out. Also, it might give it a younger feel which would appeal to the younger generation.
6. This would be an interesting thing to do for an alternative sort of newspaper. Each day they could pick one or two issues/events and then dedicate the whole paper to it. Every article would be a different spin on the issue or show a different side to it. Everyone involved in a story has something different to say so there would be enough material. There could also be a lot of pictures to go with the stories. Every issue of the paper would be like an in-depth exclusive look into a story. It might be interesting to see how this would work.
7. It would be interesting if subscribers of a paper could have it personalized to them. Say a reader hated sports, then they would never receive the sports section. If they really enjoy the lifestyle section though, maybe their paper would include an extra pullout with more articles in that section. This idea is a big long shot and would require a lot of extra work on the part of the people at the paper, but it would also save money on printing if not every subscriber gets every section. Also, the readers would feel special that they paper cared that much about them individually.
8. Since people are very into the environment lately it would interesting to make a green paper. Every issue could be printed on recycled paper. People would feel inclined to buy it if they knew they were helping the environment. Also, whenever someone recycled the paper at a certain place it could just go right back to the newspaper for them to use again later. It would cut down on waste which people care about.
9. It might be interesting if papers did contests or giveaways that can only be won by buying the paper. There could be a contest people could just enter by signing up or they could have to read through the paper and find the clues to solve something. The winners would have to show proof of purchase (meaning more people will want to buy it to win) and they could get awesome prizes, like sports tickets or gift cards.
10. I read an article today about a reporter who uses Twitter to ask the general public for help with her articles. She says she needs help investigating or finding sources and then her readers actually go out with her in the city and help her. I think if every reporter for a certain paper did this, then their readership would increase because people like to see that the reporters are real people. Also, if they helped, then they probably want to see the finished project.

Response to Nieman Article

I found the article "Do journalism schools really need to be teaching hospitals?" by Justin Ellis to be very interesting and I definitely agree with the view of David Ryfe and Donica Mensing. I think making journalism schools similar to teaching hospitals is a bad idea and I think that it would actually make journalists less prepared to enter the newsroom. This is why I found it interesting that the article said that some people say that the model is a "way of offering real-world reporting experience to students." Like Ryfe and Mensing, I find that to be completely ridiculous because the industry is always changing. Training someone in such a specific way would be a complete waste of time.

For me personally, I believe that the best way to learn about journalism, news writing, and reporting is to just jump right into it. You have to learn by doing and by gaining actual experience. This way you'll be constantly learning new things and adapting to different situations. You learn how things work best for you or how they work best for your paper/editor. I think teaching somebody in a certain way will just get them stuck in a mindset that they can't get out of. This slows down the learning process.


I'm not sure how much I agree with the idea that being taught by older journalists will make younger ones more cynical. While I do think that learning through experience is the best way to go, I also believe that you should take advice where you can get it. If someone who's been in the field for a long time offers you advice, you should listen and learn from there. This being said though, I think this should be done when the writer/reporter is actually working so that they can apply it to their job. It shouldn't be used as a method of teaching.


Overall I agree with the arguments made by Ryfe and Mensing because it is very true that you can't teach someone about something that is always changing. I also would like to say that Justin Ellis, the author of this article, did a great job with those Scrubs references. I was thoroughly entertained.

How I Get My News

Despite being a Journalism major, I must admit that I don't read the news as regularly as I probably should. I feel kind of guilty about this because I feel as if I should be reading the news religiously or something. The thing is though, I don't really always have the time to sit down and read an article unless it really interests me. Because of this, I tend to get my news in short, quick headlines.

I get most of my news from Twitter and just reading the tweets, but not actually clicking the links. The news sources that I follow are The Boston Globe, The New York Times, The Huffington Post, The Wall Street Journal, WMUR News 9, and several other New Hampshire newspapers. I know that I should probably be reading the news more and staying up to date with what's going on in the country and in the world, but skimming through these headlines keeps me at least somewhat in the know. I also get a good amount of my news from the MSN homepage on my computer. Once again though, I only tend to read headlines.

I would really like to start reading the news more and becoming more aware of what is happening in the world around me. I think it's important not only as a Journalism major, but as a member of society. I have been trying to read The Boston Globe more since I have the subscription through UNH but I usually read only one article and then I'm done. I would like to start carving out some time each day that I dedicate to reading it, just like I do with the novels I read.

I think the reason I don't like to read the news as much is because I don't think I want to be the kind of journalist who writes hard news. I prefer magazines and human interest type articles, or issue stories. I would really love to write for a women's magazine. At the same time though, I do enjoy writing news stories and I think it's important to stay in the know.