CNN and the Fascination of Mugshots

After an entire semester of scouring CNN for unethical or irresponsible journalism I believe I found the answer to all their mistakes. CNN does not understand what responsible journalism is. This notion was made concrete after reading the article Media Taking Mug Shots -- Foreign, Familiar -- to Bank by Elliot C. McLaughlin.

McLauglin's article talks about our society's fascination with mugshots. John Watson, a suppposed expert on journlistic ethics stated:

"These are pictures of monsters who actually exist, and we can look at them from
the safety of wherever we are, and they disappear when we close the book."

I find it hard to take either the writer of this article or his source very seriously. Monsters? Did he really just classify anyone who is ever arrested and had their mugshot published as a monster? Maybe I need to check, but I don't believe we live in communist Russia where all people are guilty until proven innocent. In America being arrested does not prove guilt.

This article's largest flaw is the complete absense of any discussion relating to the impugnity of those arrested who are innocent. The focus of this piece is how fascinated we all are when we see that mugshot and this would be the perfect opportunity, if not necessary opportunity, for CNN make note of how these images can slander the innocent. It is obvious that, after we read the police logs or an actual article about an illeged criminal, our opinion of that person has been tarnished. Even after that person has been aquited of the charges many of us may not be aware of the person's innocense or at the very least will still hold some negative feelings. This article needed to explain the issue of reporting on those not yet convicted. Many people read the news everyday without thinking deeper into whether or not this person is truly guilty.

Works Cited
Media Taking Mug Shots -- Foreign, Familiar -- to Bank http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/12/08/mugshots.fascination/index.html

CNN as Ad Agent for Son...(Correction) Nokia?

When I delved into the task of writing my first blog on the irresponsibility of media, I figured that finding a hard hitting example would be fairly difficult. Fortunately however, I stumbled across a very discreet tactic. CNN had published an article declaring a dooms day for iPods based solely on the fact that so many people already own one. Meanwhile, two articles later CNN posted a video showing all the “amazing” features about a Sony product that directly competes with iPods. It just so happened that CNN’s corporate owner, AOL Time Warner, had partnered with Sony in an effort to produce wireless broadband technologies. I was very pleased by finding this connection, but figured that that relationship would not crop up again. I was wrong.

In a direct answer to the original iPod article, CNN was forced admit defeat. Phillip Dewitt’s assumption that current iPod owners wouldn’t go for any future iPods was wrong. In his original article he wrote:

“Will these changes be enough to bring back the days of double- or triple-digit
sales growth? Probably not. But if the price cuts are steep enough and there are
enough new and interesting things you can do with iPods — like download
applications from the App Store — the latest versions could find their way onto
Christmas wish lists for a few more years.”

Well the iPod did find its way on to Christmas lists this year and the one place they didn’t find themselves were on store shelves. Best Buy, Target, Walmart and Crutchfield have all reported shortages this Christmas season due to the excessive demand. Being so wrong must sting, but this did not prevent CNN from their continued effort to support the products of their partners.
After reading the iPod concession speech I continued on down the tech page and was forced to rub my eyes and fight off déjà vu. It wasn’t the Sony Mylo this time, but the Nokia N97.

“The N97 will feature a 3.5-inch touch screen with 50 percent greater resolution
than the iPhone. It will also have a slide-out alphabetic keyboard, making it
similar in overall design to the Xperia X1 recently launched by competitor Sony
Ericsson.”

So it seems that CNN has been given some heat on the issue of high sales for iPod products (Notice the nod to Sony as well). So, just as before, I went digging. I first found that Nokia is not owned by anyone else but happens to be the number one brand name in Europe and Asia, and not unpopular in the States. So I continued on and looked for a connection between CNN and Nokia. With my first Google search, I was successful.

“CNN Interactive and Nokia join forces to offer CNN Mobile, 24-hour news
service for digital wireless phones”

I believe that title sums it up completely. For fear of continued iPhone and iPod sales growth, CNN has jumped in as an advertiser once again. They have now given reason to consumers to hold their horses on buying an Apple product and wait for their partner’s rival cell phone.

I'm beginning to find it harder and harder to explain the reasons for why CNN is being irresponsible. It is almost needless to say at this point that a new agency should not be creating "news" for the purpose of pushing products. Yes, I understand that CNN or rather AOL Time Warner generates it revenue through the advertisements of its partners. But there must be a division between a news article and an ad. This kind of deception is what discredits a news agency and makes me among many others concerned about whether what we're reading is news or fluff.

Works Cited:

Can Steve Jobs Save the iPod?http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/09/04/can-steve-jobs-save-the-ipod/

The Sony Mylo http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/tech/2008/09/04/aqui.pirillo.sony.mylo.cnn?iref=videosearch

Nokia Device to Challenge RIM and Apple Next Year http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1863265,00.html?cnn=yes

iPod holiday sales: Hot or cold? http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/12/03/ipod-holiday-sales-hot-or-cold/

Little Change on Embedded Journalism

Though I myself have become an Obama convert, I still hold my skepticism on my sleeve. The idea of change is great but I’m waiting to see that change before I start dancing in the street. One fear I’ve had going into an Obama Presidency is the coddling of the press. Though he has yet to take the office, the press appears to already hold an affinity for the President Elect. In Jim Kavanagh’s CNN article White House Job Application Leaves No Stone Unturned shows what journalism without scrutiny can look like.

The Obama transistion team has put together a wopping sixty-three point questionnaire to screen their large list of potential appointees. The questions range from applicant’s relationships with Fannie and Freddie to, “Have you had any association with any person, group or business venture that could be used – even unfairly – to impugn or attack your character or qualifications for government service?” The questions are extensive but my question is: so what?

Am I supposed to be impressed by a sixty-three question screening process? This is the appointment to a post by the President of the United States. I should sure hope they leave no stone unturned. This article almost congratulates Obama for asking tough questions. I think the largest problem with this article is that it gives no context for the process. What have previous administrations done to screen their appointees? Is this questionnaire more critical than past screening processes? There appears to be no research done in this article other than the coddling of the President Elect.

Works Cited:
White House Job Application Leaves No Stone Unturned
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/weekinreview/05broder.html

The Unconstitutional Powers of the Vice President

With the current election coming to end there is a feeling of both relief and nervousness in the air. After nearly two years of campaigning, the robophone calls and all the political ads will come to a welcomed end. The fear for me however, comes from the possibility of Sarah Palin taking the Vice Presidency. Over the past few weeks pundits have been criticizing Palin for her lack of understanding of the duties of Vice President. I will admit, I was unclear as well, but then again I’m not running for the second highest office in the United States. In the hopes that this fits within the blogging assignment, I decided to discuss an article that acted responsibly. John M. Broder of the New York Times writes in his article, The Heartbeat Job, how the Vice President’s role in government has changed over the years and how Biden and Palin understand their roles as VP.

“Three decades after Mr. Rockefeller departed the office, Dick
Cheney has transformed it into a veritable fourth branch of government. Mr.
Cheney pursued his agenda across a broad range of policy, including the war in
Iraq, treatment of suspected terrorists, domestic surveillance, energy and the
environment. His authority at times seemed to eclipse that of President Bush.”

After eight years of a Vice President flexing his power so heavily, it is necessary for Americans to understand exactly what the job entails and how the two VP candidates plan use that power. Sen. Biden said,

“…the sole constitutional power of the vice president is to preside over the
Senate and cast a vote in the event of a tie. Mr. Biden said his understanding
with Senator Barack
Obama was that he would act as a senior minister without portfolio and
liaison to Congress.
He called Mr. Cheney’s project to expand the power of
the executive — and of his own office — ‘very dangerous.’”

On the contrary, Gov. Sarah Palin claimed,

“…that the Constitution gave great “flexibility” to the vice president, and that
she hoped to be given even more authority. “And we will do what is best for the
American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is
supportive and cooperative with the president’s agenda in that position.”

What makes Broder’s article so helpful to the reader is that he gives history as told by experts and uses that evidence in relation to the current U.S. situation. The Constitution gave little responsibility to the Vice Presidency but Walter Mondale began a shift of power to the VP that had never been exerted. The VPs grew to have more and more responsibility up until the current administration whose Vice President acts a veritable puppet master. For these reasons made evident in the article, the reader is given very good reason to be concerned about who could be occupying this position come January.

Though this article lacks in diversity, the message it is trying to convey is something that most Americans, regardless of political leaning, will find crucial. Many of the current U.S. woes can be attributed to a failed administration whose use of power has been unconstitutional. Broder takes on the his responsiblilty in making this issue relevant to his readers and givng them the necessary information to make an opinion. This is the sort of responsibility the American people need to be demanding from their news.


Works Cited:
The Heartbeat Job
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/weekinreview/05broder.html


Imagery
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-cheneypuppetmaster.htm

Sony Strikes Again!

With my previous article that found a relationship between the owner of CNN, AOL Time Warner, and the electronic super giant, Sony, my ears have become attuned to their associations. Yet again, I find an article that poses as news while acts more strongly as a commercial. Sony Game Delayed Over Quran Gaffe spent more the article giving praise to the game than addressing the issue of offensive content.

A new console game titled “LittleBigPlanet” has come into controversy ahead of its release due to lyrics that can be found in the Quran. Though this seems to be the focus of the article, the majority of the piece is not. This brief article focused heavily on the reviews and alleged anticipation of the game, rather than the subject of its headline.

“…described by review Web site IGN.com as ‘instant classic’…”
“…the
console’s first launch of an icon to match Nintendo’s ubiquitous Mario…”
“…will now begin shipping in North America in the week of October 27.”

These quotes jump out at me like a trailer hyping the release of a new movie. Though they address the condolences that the videogame makers have for the gaffe, the article serves as little more than a public relations statement.

My greatest shock is that as this subject rides on the tail coat of the rage brought on by the European cartoons depicting Mohammad. This article lost a great opportunity to act responsibly. The anger that came from the Mohammad cartoons sent devoted Muslims into the streets in protest. With the most dominant religion in the world being Islam, it startles me that an article like this could be written without putting the offensive nature of the lyrics into context.

This article could dodge the pitfall of being merely a P.R. statement and actually be an informative piece of journalism with a few simple examples of investigation. Put the event into context by explaining why these lyrics could be offensive. Describe examples similar to this where offense was taken and what the outcome was. Make this article diverse by interviewing people with differing opinions. Some debate within the article as to whether or not these lyrics should be taken so seriously would help to bring the reader to a well made consensus on the issue. This article did nothing that would allow me to give my opinion on the matter other than making me interested in an upcoming game.

Works Cited:
Sony Game Delayed Over Quran Gaffe
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/ptech/10/20/littlebigplanet.delay/index.html

Espionage or Slander?

Espionage and giving secrets to the enemy is the theme of a recent CNN article. No, it’s not about the Russians; it is our own Iranians we must now fear. “British soldier ‘sent coded spy offer to Iran’” the title read and seemed relatively harmless. Cpl. Daniel James, a British interpreter in Afghanistan apparently sent a coded message to the Iranians offering his espionage service. No information was sent and he was discovered before wrong doing could be made. The kicker is however, that he was originally from Iran.

For me, this article was really about the fear that NATO and other major world militaries don’t have the oversight needed to prevent leaks from happening. However, when I finished reading I scrolled up to read CNN’s story highlights to see what they felt I should take away from the article. The highlights read,

British soldier in Afghanistan offered to spy for Iran, court told
Cpl. Daniel James was translator for NATO commander in Afghanistan
James denies communicating information useful to an enemy
James was born Esmail Mohammed Beigi Gamasai in Iran

I have grown increasingly skeptical of reports that cast doubt and blame on Middle Eastern people. This article should not have been about James’ ethnicity. This article was about the lack of oversight in major militaries.

Had the article included additional information, the mention of James’ background would not have struck me so hard. Does dangerous information leak often? Should I fear that more members of NATO and the like are working for terrorists? These questions were not asked and instead I am lead to believe that more people of Middle Eastern descent must not be trusted.
So how could this article better represent responsible journalism? Diversity of opinion is always a great way of getting to the root of a story. The opinions of fellow soldiers, the General that James worked for, other native Middle Eastern troops, even Iranian soldiers would aid in making this a comprehensive article. Another major problem is the vagueness of the article. There needs to be more reporting on whether or not espionage is common.

I have a hard time following the money on this one. I don’t see this as so much having to do with money but morphing an image of what Americans view Middle Eastern people as. I see asserted efforts to create a fear and distrust for these people. And while war rages on, it is the agenda of the administration to bolster this fear and even hatred.

Works Cited:

British soldier ‘sent coded spy offer to Iran’

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/10/13/spy.trial.ap/index.html

The Brewing and Swirling Controversy

-

When I woke up this Thursday morning there was only one thought in my head. Palin vs. Biden! I jumped out of bed and threw on my Palin vs. Biden t-shirt and ran to the T.V. to see all the pre-debate coverage. Well, actually no, but should I have? I mean I’m supposed be this energized about tonight’s debate. All the ads and political commentary is saying it’s a major media event. I guess I’m just tuning in see if it will be anymore contentless than the Presidential nominee debate. But in the context of the debate I found another case of my main news source making money off articles.

“Controversy swirled over vice presidential debate moderator Gwen Ifill one day
before the face-off between Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. Joe Biden, after new
scrutiny was drawn to her upcoming book featuring Barack Obama.”

CNN’s article Controversy brews up around VP debate moderator Ifill has set the tone for tonight’s debate. Controversy will be brewing and swirling pretty much sums up the problem I have with this article. At 9 p.m. much of America and many people around the world for that matter will be watching. The more people that watch, the more money CNN rakes in from advertisement. With that in mind, I read on as CNN inflated an argument.

Detailing the struggle for civil rights and the black political movements, The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama by Gwen Ifill comes into conflict because Ifill is tonight’s moderator. Having a biased moderator is of course not ideal, but unless it’s been a robot moderating debates, we haven’t ever had a truly unbiased moderator. When watching the debate it is our jobs to detect any slant to one candidate. This is nothing new and neither is Ifill’s book.

It didn’t just leak out this morning that she wrote a book. Ifill’s spokeswoman Anne Bell stated,

"Right now Gwen is in St. Louis. Her focus is on the debate. ... I don't think
it's anything she needs to worry about or address. It's in her bio, there have
been articles about it,"

More than likely CNN had this information on hand for a while. The timing is the key. The day of the debate a pseudo-scandal erupts and money pours into the media outlets.

CNN is using this article to add controversy to the debate to reel in more viewers. This illustrates what new media has done to our Presidential elections. No longer is about the issues. It can be grouped in with shows like Lost and Dancing with the Stars. The debate is really about publicity. Technology has aided us by making politics more accessible to many people. Many people mean a large potential for profits. It is CNN’s effort to generate profits that muddies good journalism with capitalism.


Works Cited:

Controversy brews up around VP debate moderator Ifill
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/01/gwen.ifill/index.html

Manovich, Lev. “What is New Media?”
The Language of New Media.
Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2001. 25

McCain and Obama Storm Washington to Solve the Economic Crisis

-

A coalition lead by McCain will once and for all break down the walls of partisanship. "Tear down that wall!" the bipartisan council will yell and a solution to the economic crisis will be made. Or so CNN would describe.

McCain announced Wednesday he is halting his campaign and marching down to Washington to solve the lending crisis. His campaign however, is no doubt on full alert. Obama joined his ranks without hesitation but McCain stated that unless a decision is made by Friday, the debate in Mississippi will be postponed. It is quite clear that the cancelation of the debate is not in CNN’s interests, especially when considering the amount of viewers that would be lost. CNN made sure to point out reasons for why the debate must continue.

"It's my belief that this is exactly the time when the American people need to
hear from the person will be the next president," the Democrat said in
Clearwater, Florida. "It is going to be part of the president's job to deal with
more than one thing at once. It's more important than ever to present ourselves
to the American people."

The University of Mississippi, the host of
Friday's presidential debate, said it is going ahead with preparations for the
event.

CNN even included a video link, “Watch Obama say debate shouldn’t be postponed”. By building up an artificial argument, CNN is pigeon holing McCain into accepting the debate. But more importantly I was most concerned about the lack of scrutiny placed on what is a purely political move. The one piece of criticism came not from CNN but rather the Sen. Chuck Schumer.

We haven't heard hide nor hair of Sen. McCain in these negotiations," said
Schumer, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. "He has not been involved
except for an occasional, unhelpful statement, sort of thrown from far away, and
the last thing we need in these delicate negotiations is an injection of
presidential politics."

I find it hard to understand that such an overt political tactic could be reported on with such little scrutiny. Nowhere in the article did it explain why of all people Mccain or Obama would be the person to solve this. Nowhere in the article did it detail the roles the nominees would have in the negotiations. There is a senate and a congress full of elected officials. So why it is that McCain and Obama are somehow elevated to the status of savior and will be the ones to solve this? Oh yeah I forgot, they are the ones running for office.

Ron Smith writes about diversity in Groping for Ethics in Journalism, however he misses how diversity relates not just to race but also diversity of opinion. CNN's article gave Sen. Schumer's opinion merely as an attempt to counterbalanced the excess amount of praise they quoted from other officials.

But Sen. Lindsey Graham, a McCain ally, said that having the candidates join in
negotiations over the bailout would be "enormously helpful."
"We need a
solution on this financial crisis more than we need a foreign policy debate,"
said Graham, R-South Carolina. "The next seven days could determine the
financial well-being of this country. We can postpone the debate for a week."
And Rep. Roy Blunt, the Republicans' House whip, said McCain's decision "is
a testament to the fact that [he] is a guy who would rather be part of the
solution than run away from the fight."

Though Smith's chapter on sources and quoting them correctly was abided by, this article completely drops the ball on diversity of opinion. There are surely more related people with differing opinions, but the readers are left with only a narrow viewpoint. We are lead to assume that either it is a good or bad thing that the two join the talks. No mention of alterior motives on the point on John McCain. No mention of what effect the two will have during the negotiations. No critical thinking on the part of CNN but rather more pandering to the nominees.

Works Cited:

McCain, Obama headed to Washington for Bailout Talks
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/24/campaign.wrap/index.html

Smith, Ron F. “Diversity.”
Groping for Ethics in Journalism.
Ames: Blackwell Publishing, 2003. 101

Smith, Ron F. “Faking the News.”
Groping for Ethics in Journalism.
Ames: Blackwell Publishing, 2003. 133

CNN as an Ad Agent for Sony?

Advertisers use of product placement in the media has become increasingly apparent to me. While reading CNN.com for the news, as I do daily, I stumbled upon a strange coincidence, but maybe coincidence isn’t the correct word to use. An article titled Can Steve Jobs Save the iPod? painted a rather sinister outlook for the iPod, especially considering they are the industry standard for portable MP3 playing. According to CNN’s Philip DeWitt, iPod sales have peaked and from there can only go down. It seems that unless Steve Jobs and Apple can continue to make some major innovations iPod sales can only drop. And after detailing the upcoming advancements to the iPod DeWitt says,

“Will these changes be enough to bring back the days of double- or triple-digit
sales growth? Probably not. But if the price cuts are steep enough and there are
enough new and interesting things you can do with iPods — like download
applications from the App Store — the latest versions could find their way onto
Christmas wish lists for a few more years.”

The overall tone of the article proclaims that iPods are old news and will be a declining trend over the next few years.

After coping with the brutal reality that my incredibly innovative iPod Touch, which has no other worthy competitor on the market, is actually outdated I managed to read on through more CNN articles. To my bemusement, only two articles down, was a CNN Video informing me about this great new device called the Sony Mylo, note the sarcasm. This “news” video described to me the many awesome things the Mylo could do, along with repeating the name, Mylo, every other sentence. I was never aware that CNN did infomercials. The hip tech guy, who presumably can relate to late teens and twenty somethings, even managed to make a jab at Apple. “I can download all my Podcasts so I can use something that’s not an iPhone” he said with a hint of disgust in his voice.

I couldn’t help but see a motive here. Could there be any reason for CNN to downplay Apple’s iPod in one story and hype up a Sony device in the other? So I went searching for who owns CNN. It turns out that CNN is owned by the massive media corporation AOL Time Warner. So if anyone wanted to slight Apple and praise Sony, it must be them. I searched again, but now for a relationship between AOL Time Warner and Sony. I figured if they had any corporate alliances, this could explain CNN’s stories. Sure enough, back in 2001 AOL Time Warner and Sony Collaborate to Accelerate Next-Generation Online Entertainment and Other Consumer Broadband Experiences. Right off Sony’s website and this could not fit the “coincidence” I found any more perfectly. Sony, like everyone else, is looking to cut down Apple’s dominance over the MP3/cell phone market following the success of the iPhone. So their partner, AOL Time Warner, carefully place an article that shoots down iPods and iPhones to divert sales. And while the readers still have the iPod obituary in their minds, nail them with a plug for the competitive Sony product.

This revelation goes entirely past the ethical threshold of proper journalism. It is the news media’s job to inform, nurture and be fair1. These tenets prescribe that journalists must be reporting about pertinent information and explain why that information is so important. It is not the job of the news media to sell products or even worse try and manipulate the sales in a market to support a corporate ally. Lucky for me, this was about a needless Sony product which I have no interest in buying. But what about the hundreds of other articles CNN posts? Because of unethical choices like this, all that CNN reports is now called into question. This is a perfect example of how the media is not acting as a watchdog2 but rather a lap dog3.

Works Cited:
1. Smith, Ron F. “The Search for Principles.”
Groping for Ethics in Journalism.
Ames: Blackwell Publishing, 2003. 10
2. Smith, Ron F. “The Search for Principles.”
Groping for Ethics in Journalism.
Ames: Blackwell Publishing, 2003. 12
3. Craig Chevrier – Social Responsibility in the Media, 09-12-08

Can Steve Jobs Save the iPod?
http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/09/04/can-steve-jobs-save-the-ipod/
The Sony Mylo
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/tech/2008/09/04/aqui.pirillo.sony.mylo.cnn?iref=videosearch
AOL Time Warner and Sony Collaborate to Accelerate Next-Generation Online Entertainment and Other Consumer Broadband Experiences
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press_Archive/200111/01-1113BE/