Last Look at Jones's "Losing the News" (Nov. 17)

In "Saving the News," the last chapter of Jones's Losing the News, he makes a number of educated guesses about the future of the newspaper and of the news itself. Do you agree with him on any of his conclusions, or do you think he is simply engaging in wistful thinking?
He speaks of the adjustments news practitioners have made from media to media. Is the internet just one more "media" to be mastered? Or are we headed toward the loss of the "verifiable facts" we need to support a democracy?

Off-week question: Nov. 2

If Facebook may attract so many people because--perhaps--its users care more about publishing their thoughts than actually communicating with others or informing them--does this give some credence to the "citizen journalism" Jones writes about on p. 190 of "The New News Media" in Losing the News? That is, do you see something like "citizen journalism" fitting into your world--or is Jones putting all his eggs into this electronic basket?
Is the idea of "citizen journalism" something that might be in our future--or is it possible that it is already here (E. g. commentary citizens currently contribute to online news sites or blogs becoming the information of the news sites)?
 Or do you think Jones's ideas are far-fetched? Remember that news aggregates like AP & Reuters rely on paid journalists' work, as do all bloggers, whether they have followers (like Drudge, Huffington) or whether they are like this blog, created by us and for us exclusively.

Off-week questions (Oct. 19)

On ethics:
Jones says (citing Kovach and Rosenstiel's The Elements of Journalism) that the most important beliefs journalists share are: 1) Journalism's first obligation is to the truth; 2) Its first loyalty is to citizens; and 3) its essence is a discipline of verification (106). In light of those three tenets, how should reporters cover the government at a time like today? Are they doing a good job as far as you can tell? Are any journalistic outlets you know of behaving unethically?

On the development of news in America:
In "The Curious Story of News" you get a short history of news coverage from the beginnings of the United States through the 20th century. It becomes an industry in our lifetimes that changes before our eyes. Has it changed for the better--or for the worse? (I have no agenda here. Is this an arguable question?)

Very good points, Maureen. Considering the ads I've seen and the comments on TV shows with agendas and money to make, maybe politicians do this to each other as much as journalists do. Politicians can refute lies and defend truth. Reporters can only report. And I should research, or someone should, why SPJ says a code with teeth is against the First Amendment.

Off-week Question

Jones writes about the complicated history of the First Amendment in chapter three. While he says America's press freedoms have often, if not always, been curtailed in wartime, what dangers--if any--do you see in the limitations placed on the current Freedom of Information Act (restricting  information that can be printed about the government or the Patriot Act)? If the Taliban or Islamic extremists threaten us--and they do--should government have the right to restrict (classify) information or otherwise control ("embedding" journalists, holding secret meetings, denying what is true) what journalists can know in order to inform us?

Also, how aware do you think people are today about Watergate and the newspaper that forced a president's resignation? This might have a bearing on how you answer the above question.

Off-week #2: Especially notice Jones's divisions for the Media

On page 43, he cites political scientist Robert M. Entman to divide media into four categories and then applies five key journalistic standards to them. This is very, very useful. Does what he says fit the media you watch/read? Think of a specific example and see if his rules apply.
Also, remember to submit news quiz questions by e-mail, unless you want everyone to see them on the blog.

Want to be Sure of a News Quiz Answer?

Write one--or two--or? Realize that your test-taker would appreciate it if she has at least a chance to answer it. Thus, it should be more important news, hard core news, provided by a reasonable source. Or--it should relate to a larger question that can be answered by common sense. Give it a try.