Magzalez’s eyes on media

*Check out this blog’s new address*

António Granado is the author of the Portuguese-language blog, Ponto Media. He is also the online editor of Portugal’s Público. Granado announced that as of yesterday, people can, with certain limitations, personalize the appearance of the Web site.

Granado recently sat down with Alex Gamela to talk about the state of online journalism in Portugal and Público’s place in the forefront of this endeavor. It is an interesting read. It can be read in English on Paul Bradshaw’s blog.

The most interesting idea presented by Granado:

It is clear that most universities aren’t preparing the students for the new realities. For example, there’s still a separation between the teaching of written, radio and TV journalism, which is an outdated 20th century concept.

This is a problem at my school, the University of Florida. At school, as a journalism major concentrating on new media, I am not allowed to use the resources provided to the students studying telecommunications, even though we are in the same college. That includes radio and TV equipment like microphones, video cameras, editing software, high-powered computers, etc. I am also not allowed to take high-level audio and video editing classes.

What is an aspiring new media journalist to do? Is this setting the right example for convergence?

I was perusing The New York Times’ tennis page recently. I noticed that they seem to like their tennis over there.

There are at least three interactive features on the tennis page. All of them are great. One is even funny. Check them out:

• The Master of Clay Takes Aim at the Fast Courts: I actually talked about this piece on my very first blog entry. It shows how Rafael Nadal’s spins differ on different tennis surfaces. Looking back on it, I still like it.
• Beating Federer: This is the funnier one. It’s just a bunch of quotes, pictures and some audio from different players on the ATP and WTA tours about how they would try to beat world-No. 1 Roger Federer. Jelena Jankovic’s quote is my favorite.
• Serena Williams’ Professional Career: I’m not sure what to say about this one. Well first I have to say, tsk tsk on “Williams’s.” Other than that, it’s a lot of information. It looks like it took a really, really long time to put together. The amount of information is remarkable, and the databasing behind this must be monstrous. I have no criticisms and only one cynicism: who would really want to know this much about anyone? Me.

I’m glad to see The New York Times has time to spare on one of my favorite subjects. Not very many papers have the personnel or money to have a staff devote so much of it’s time to this wonderful sport.

I was perusing The New York Times’ tennis page recently. I noticed that they seem to like their tennis over there.

There are at least three interactive features on the tennis page. All of them are great. One is even funny. Check them out:

• The Master of Clay Takes Aim at the Fast Courts: I actually talked about this piece on my very first blog entry. It shows how Rafael Nadal’s spins differ on different tennis surfaces. Looking back on it, I still like it.
• Beating Federer: This is the funnier one. It’s just a bunch of quotes, pictures and some audio from different players on the ATP and WTA tours about how they would try to beat world-No. 1 Roger Federer. Jelena Jankovic’s quote is my favorite.
• Serena Williams’ Professional Career: I’m not sure what to say about this one. Well first I have to say, tsk tsk on “Williams’s.” Other than that, it’s a lot of information. It looks like it took a really, really long time to put together. The amount of information is remarkable, and the databasing behind this must be monstrous. I have no criticisms and only one cynicism: who would really want to know this much about anyone? Me.

I’m glad to see The New York Times has time to spare on one of my favorite subjects. Not very many papers have the personnel or money to have a staff devote so much of it’s time to this wonderful sport.

I’m back a little earlier than expected because I read something today in The Miami Herald that sparked my interest, “Pro-Chávez lawmaker slaps journalist.” For those of you who don’t know, Hugo Chávez is the president of Venezuela.

Now for a little exposition: Last year, I was told to write a critique of a Flash package for my Advanced Online Media Production class taught by none other than Mindy McAdams. Let me say, this is in no way a criticism toward McAdams, only an observation I have seen in college from more than one professor. McAdams has been the most helpful and genuine professor I have had in all my studies at the University of Florida. I think this is why she had no reservations giving me her opinions and true thoughts on the subject. But it is also the reason why I have thought so long and hard about what she told me.

I decided to do my critique on a very interesting piece by The Miami Herald called “On the trail of Che.” That is of course a reference to Ernesto “Che” Guevara, long-gone, long-heralded revolutionary. It was told through the eyes of former diplomats and CIA agents who vocally oppose the ideas of Che Guevara. Take a look at the story for yourself to gather your own opinions.

McAdams liked the package and the critique. She thought it was a great piece of Flash production, but she called into question the journalism. This is what she wrote on her del.icio.us account about it:

Long video, well produced; excellent gallery of 34 photos; text story, not overlong. Beautiful package design. This is the main feature of interest here, although the story provides fascinating propaganda for the exiles of Cuba…

Now to tie the piece about Che and the story about the lady that attacked the journalist together. I do indeed see a bias here. The Cuban-exile community, and now the Venezuelan-exile community, makes up a significant number of the Miami (city or county) population. These are the people that the newspaper is writing for. It’s not to say that the newspaper should cater to the people, because sometimes the people need to hear things they don’t want to. But it all goes back to writing with confidence and assertion.

The journalists at The Miami Herald aren’t throwing out propaganda to their readers when they criticize the Venezuelan and Cuban governments. They are writing with assertion and confidence, retelling through an analysis of a new event the experiences they have had in countries that no longer value freedom of speech or freedom of the press.

I noticed that The Miami Herald was the only newspaper that I could easily find that at least posted this AP story from Caracas, Venezuela online. I’m sure that the TV stations in Miami were among the few that aired the video. Were other more “liberal” newspapers turning a blind eye, or do they just not care? Honestly, the news probably wouldn’t have caught the eye of many other newspapers’ markets.

I often wonder what professors are thinking when they talk about “conservative views” in The Miami Herald—which true Cuban-exiles like my uncle, my grandfather, etc. actually consider The Miami Herald “basura esquierdista” or leftist trash. Perception is relative.

So yes, I understand that a pro-Castro, pro-socialism, pro-Chávez individual might discard such news stories as biased garbage, but it all goes back to one major criticism that I have of the Castro government, and now more and more the Chávez government; how can any journalist not be at least slightly biased against a place where there is no freedom of speech? How can you support a government that spits in the eye of the truest of the core values of your profession? Doesn’t the term “liberal” mean valuing the rights of the individual?

Thoughts? Comments? Is anyone from The Miami Herald willing to defend their paper?

I once wrote to the editor in charge of the Che story and asked him what he thought about this very subject. He never got back to me. I guess he didn’t care what people think, but I certainly do. That’s why I’m asking these questions.

Here is a video of the Venezuelan lawmaker’s attack. I had to get a video in Spanish because the only one I could find in English was made by Fox News, and I don’t want you to get the wrong impression.

*Check out this blog’s new location*

Along the lines of my last post, I’m going over some of the key ideas I have learned this semester. This nugget of advice came courtesy of my editing professor, Ronald Rodgers.

In his editing class, Rodgers emphasizes cultural literacy. He gives us a list of terms ranging from Web 2.0 to libertarianism. He expects us to go over the list of terms and research them further. He also expects us to keep an eye on the news. He quizzes us frequently in hopes that we will be forced take his advice seriously.

He combines the importance of cultural literacy with the idea that as writers we must write with confidence. He insists that when we have a firm grasp of the topic we are writing about and an understanding of cultural literacy, we can write with confidence and assertion. That confidence allows us as journalists to make a better analysis of events without the need for attribution.

The question that arose when I explained these concepts to a friend of mine was “So he wants you to know a little about everything making you an expert at nothing?” I understood the negative connotation of his question, yet I felt he hit it on the head..sort of.

As journalists we have to know a little, or a lot even, about everything as well as come to a firm understanding of what we are writing about. If we start off knowing a little about everything. Over time, the more stories we write and the more topics we research, our areas of expertise will grow. But that initial knowledge is what will give us the opportunity to grow.

Have a good Thanksgiving. I’ll be back here on Monday.