Friday, September 24, 2010
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Panasonic rocks my world
Check out this video of the new, not quite yet released, Panasonic AG-AF100 Micro 4/3 Video Camera (not DSLR!)
Panasonic AG-AF100 / AF101 from UrbanFox.TV on Vimeo.
Good News Everyone!
Good News Everyone! We're out of the recession! Don't believe me? Check out what Harvard Economics Prof Jeffrey Frankel has to say about it.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Shirley Sherrod and the Shame of the Scoop
Social media, the internet, even cable TV and radio have all been technological advances used to bring us news faster than ever before. Until recently, though, there was still a delay. Stories would be developed, written and then published on a cycle (generally daily, with a deadline). With the advent of these faster means of communication this cycle has been broken down into a rough guideline.
This has great benefits, and great failures. News can be tweeted, tumbld, and blogged by anyone anywhere (Mumbai and Iran are two great examples I can think of off the top of my head).
Because of the speed of the news, many sources seem to be ignoring the ethical code of journalism in favor of being the first to break the story. Such is the case with Shirley Sherrod.
Shirley Sherrod was the director of rural development in Georgia for the USDA, that is she was director until a conservative blogger, Andrew Breitbart, posted a video clip where Sherrod was telling the NAACP about a time when she didn't want to help a white farmer based on his color (Sherrod is black, by the way).
As soon as Breitbart had posted this video, it was picked up by Fox to be aired on TV. However, what is even more amazing is that before the video was aired, Sherrod was fired.
The best part of the whole ordeal? The video of Sherrod was (almost definitely libelously) edited to make her appear racist. The rest of the video clip shows her discussing how she didn't act on this thought and instead helped to save the white farmer's land from foreclosure and how they've formed a very tight friendship ever since.
After the full video was exposed, the USDA offered Sherrod her job back and she declined.
So what's the moral here?
Journalism in America was founded on a system of ethics. The People should be able to trust their news sources to be actually fair and balanced. The lack of research done by news organizations (who still reported on Sherrod's supposed racism all day after the video broke) is absolutely astounding. Did anybody bother to look at the rest of the tape? Did anybody bother to find a source other than a blogger with an agenda? WHAT IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE IN THE MEDIA TODAY!? Please, next time you find a lead for a story, do your job. And in case you aren't sure what to do, here is a link to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Twitter Saves the Day!
Here is a great article I found on Reddit.com. A Japanese journalist, Kosuke Tsuneoka, was captured by insurgents in Afghanistan. When one of his captors got a new phone, he asked Tsuneoka to show him the internet. While helping his captors, Tsuneoka sent two tweets that led to his release.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Journalism in the UK and US
Maura posted an interesting question about journalism in the UK. I've been following the semi-recent debacle regarding photographers in the UK and Police response under Sections 43 and 44 of the Terrorism Act (2000). Basically these codes allow police to harass photographers under suspicion of terrorism. Recently, Section 44 was repealed because of the negative attention (and obvious legal issues) it has raised. However even with the repeal of section 44, people have still been stopped and questioned under Section 43. But I digress; I'll come back to photography in a bit.
Now back to Maura's original questions about the hijacking of the royal family's mobile phones. This is an obvious violation of privacy and any standard wire-tapping laws. The investigation isn't about the legality of the hijacking, as it was most certainly not legal, however it is about the police decision on when to stop the investigation of Andy Coulson's role in the matter.
The News of the World did something that was, from a journalism standpoint, completely unethical. Illegally monitoring conversations in order to create a story is possibly one of the worst things a journalist can do.
With all things digital, nothing can ever be erased. A memory card can be formatted over and over again and yet free software can be used to recover the "deleted" files. Always be careful with digital media 'cause once its out there, there's no take-backs.
As for the relationship between reporters and police here in the United States, that seems to be a case-by-case basis. I have experienced, personally, both sides of the spectrum when it comes to dealing with police. When covering news stories (primarily breaking news such as bomb threats, medical emergencies, and the recent string of pedestrian accidents) There has been little to no animosity between myself, other reporters and the police.
However, I have been personally harassed by a Purdue Police officer while taking photos on campus for my photography class.
I also follow a blog about the First Amendment and photographer's rights called Photography is Not a Crime. While I don't necessarily agree with Carlos Miller's aggressive methods of professing his rights as a US citizen, I do agree with the message he is delivering: Photographers are not Terrorists and everybody has the right to photograph and videotape in public.
I have been following Carlos's blog because he has been, over the last several years, aggregating information about police misconduct with photographers and videographers. Many times this involves camera operators for news stations and newspapers being arrested for "Disorderly conduct," when its clear the only thing they are actually being arrested for is (as Carlos puts it), "Contempt of cop."
Recently, several mainstream news sources have suddenly caught on to this not-so-new story of police officers not really understanding the law. One of the more famous ones right now involves video shot by Anthony Graber. Graber was arrested and now faces 16 years in prison for wiretapping charges, all for filming a police officer pulling him over. What makes these charges even more ridiculous is that the cop was in plainclothes, in an unmarked car, and as soon as he stopped, pulled his gun from its holster to confront Graber.
Graber filmed the incident and then put the video on Youtube. This prompted the police to raid his house and confiscate cameras and computer equipment while he spent 26 hours in jail before being charged.
Graber captured all of this while wearing a GoPro Hero HD camcorder on his helmet. A camera sitting on someone's head is definitely not hidden. While Maryland is a two-party consent state, it was obvious that a camera was present at the time of the incident.
While Graber is charged for wiretapping (which I'm pretty positive will be at least lessened if not completely dropped) There are many other people who have been helped by having their incidents recorded. A recent, and horrifying, example took place outside a Los Angeles Forever 21 store. Unfortunately the video has been removed from youtube due to a copyright infringement however it is viewable at LiveLeaks.com. Its obvious to tell that the man in the white shirt is trying to communicate that he and his friend are deaf and cannot speak or hear well. The man in the choke-hold is obviously trying to communicate that he cannot breathe.
Now if that isn't enough reason to carry some sort of camera with you every where you go, I don't know what is.
Here is a brief list of some mainstream articles about photography and police and photographer's rights:
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Congressman Anthony Weiner Plays it Straight
Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY) pretty much sums up my feelings about most elected officials. Once government becomes a career, officials stop giving a shit about their constituents and start making sure they keep
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)