1. TOPIC 1: How is Social Media used in each media vehicle? Is it used in conjunction with other media channels (cross-referencing or linking to other media)? Describe how this is happening, and in your opinion, the perceived impact on the "target" audience.
Social Media is used differently depending on which social media site is used. Twitter, for example, was generally used for linking to other media such as the corresponding Facebook page or website. It was also used for brief news updates. The perceived impact on the target audience was the hope that people will read the tweets and re-tweet them, therefore spreading the message like a virus. Facebook was used a little differently; while there were links to other media, there was also much more posting of original content, questions to survey the audience and start audience discussions, etcetera. Facebook tended to be more personal and interactive with its target audience.
2. TOPIC 2: Fact checking, accuracy, and credibility: In your analysis, compare each media vehicle, and the effectiveness of the news reporting. Does the story vary in its facts from one vehicle to another? How is the information conveyed differently across the various mass media channels? Does the use of multimedia impact fact checking, accuracy, or credibility (in other words, how are news stories supported? What sources are cited to support their reporting?)
In order from most helpful and information-filled to least, I would rate the different media vehicles as such: newspaper articles, blogs, television, social media. I tended to get the most information out of newspaper articles because they gave the most information and went the most in depth about the story. Blogs usually summarized the story and then gave an opinion/personal spin. Television was pretty helpful because it often contained brief interviews, but contained less information due to the clips being fairly short. Social media was usually not that helpful because most of the time it just gave a brief caption followed by a link to the article. The facts of the story didn't vary too much between the different vehicles, the article just contained the most, the blogs gave an opinion, and the television gave fewer facts. Basically, the newspaper articles were the best places to start learning about each story because the journalists provided the most accurate, credible, and in-depth information. Blog's were simply to help develop an opinion (agree or disagree with the author) and these blogs usually referenced either newspaper articles or television clips (these contained credible and accurate information too, just less in-depth).
3. TOPIC 3: Multi-media reporting: In cases where a news agency has both an online and another media channel presence (for example, CNN has a cable channel, plus an online website), how is the message of the story conveyed? Is the story part of an ongoing news cycle (that is, part of an hourly or other periodic broadcast)? How is the news story presented in its online counterpart? Is there a difference in the way the story is covered online?
I actually tracked some CNN stories during this project. The cable channel version of the story did present some good information, but like I said before was not incredibly in depth (due to the fact that other news stories had to be presented too). The reporter/anchor would sometimes tell viewers to check out CNN.com for the full story. Not surprisingly, the news story's online counterpart gave much more information and was good if one wanted to fully research and learn about a story. CNN's articles were nice and long and I always felt I learned much more from the article than from the TV spot. There was also some links to sources that the article was based off of and in depth comments and discussions from readers.
4. TOPIC 4: The presence of Citizen Journalism. One example of this is where news media programs take video submitted from viewers' cell phones. Another example is where websites aggregate (compile) news stories from both major- and independent sources, such as CurrentTV (http://www.currenttv.com), or even YouTube.com. How does this form of journalism impact the user experience from the audience's perspective? Does the reporting (or video in this case) raise issues of ethics, especially in terms of privacy, or freedom of speech? Explain.This form of journalism may allow some viewers to feel more interactive and intimate with the news, but for myself, and many others I'm sure, it just feels less credible and less legitimate. User submitted videos are usually fine with me, but the compiled news stories are what lose credibility for me. There is definitely an issue of privacy if my neighbor could film me doing something illegal and then submit it to the news. Freedom of speech also comes into question when compiling information from independent sources, especially if these sources have a different ethics standard than more established major sources.
