Finding myself in a cynical mood this morning, I decide to correct my attitude by distraction. I then turn to the web to discover some good news in the world. I specifically look for articles about Scotland’s vote to become independent from the United Kingdom, much to my delight I find an article entitled Scotland heads to the polls to vote on independence.

After reading this five paragraph article I am back to being cynical. Naina Bajekal writes a difficult (sloppy) to read article that is published on Time.com.  A quick google search of the author’s name and I discover that she is a graduate of the University of Oxford with a B.S. degree in English and Modern languages and has held a variety of jobs, her current being an intern at Time Magazine’s London location.

This concerns me as the article is not impressively written. So, I decide to learn more about this writer that Time has hired; her LinkedIn account shows that she can speak four languages (English, French, Spanish, and Hindi), but then again, perhaps proper journalism isn’t the focus of a language degree? But then I see that she was actually an editor of a magazine – for seven months. I decide that the seven months was probably six to many, but that’s the magazine’s problem not mine.

I quickly realize she is not anymore a subject matter expert on Scotland than she is on journalism. She is however, representing Time. Time magazine is an authority on world events, is it not? It is certainly a familiar magazine and full of worldly articles, so I decide to google search “Is Time magazine a reputable source?” and in 41 seconds there are 158,000 responses, the entire first page of results is opinion based, so is the second, third and so on. I determine that Time is a popular periodical, not an undisputed reporting authority. I am now a more discerning reader.

So I return to researching the author and I find I may be expecting too much, this is only her second published article. Perhaps Time magazine uses their website as the testing ground for potential good writers? They should put a disclaimer on the articles; much like my checkbook has a number at the top, to indicate number of articles the author has published.

Particularly distressing to me is the number of unclear sources the author pulls information from:

“While one member of the Scottish parliament praised the vote’s ‘precious democracy’ and early participation rates,” I have to ask who? Which member?

“Concerns over rising hostility in the independence campaign led one senior pro-union Better Together source” Again, who? Which senior pro—union Better Together source?

“The official in charge of the referendum vote counting told The Guardian she had ‘no concerns’” This is getting redundant, who? What official? Why am I reading an article that references another article without citation?

“…told The Guardian” Here is this odd reference again.  Is this your article or The Guardian’s article?

As convoluted and distracting as the article is, I did find the information I really wanted,  “Results from the first local authorities will start rolling in at 2 a.m. local time, but the final announcement is expected between 6:30 and 7:30 local time Friday morning” Wait, which local time zone?  Ugh… I assume it is Scotland's time zone and not my own local time. Either way I’m sure more experienced, credible writers in the world will be reporting on the outcome of the vote tomorrow, or so I hope.

Bajekal, N. (2014, September 18). Scotland heads to the polls to vote on independence. Retrieved from Time.com website: http://time.com/3397258/scotland-independence-vote/

Are social media sites reliable for obtaining credible information?

For the purposes of this blog I logged onto facebook to see what I could learn and ran across a re-posting with the comment, “Why isn't this on all the radio and TV stations?”  I wondered what could be so upsetting.  I then notice an image of an african american male and he is accused of killing someone. 

Ahhh, I have figured this out – this is a hoax to get people to click on the link and infect their computers all in search of some inflammatory racist event on the heels of raw emotions coming out of Ferguson, MO. As I am on my work computer, I roll the dice and decide to take the gamble that work has enough virus protection for me to learn more.

Here is the byline:

Suspect says he murdered New Jersey teen as revenge for U.S. military killings in Middle East:...

Ali Muhammad Brown is accused of killing a 19-year-old in New Jersey and three men in Washington...

m.nydailynews.com

I immediately assume this article is baseless sensationalism based on the link – it starts with a “m” and then is followed by what sounds like a legitimate source (virus creators are clever). The author is Meg Wagner, perhaps  Meg is the “m” and that makes her the  author/owner of the link and article. The article is dated 21 August with no year – I quickly determine that this is citizen reporting at its finest!  She even references such fine sources as NJ.com (which I was afraid to click on for fear of virus). I can only assume that I now actually have a virus on my work computer.

But then I decide to be as accurate as possible and google the name of Ali Muhammad Brown and discover that News 12 New Jersey (http://newjersey.news12.com/news/ali-muhammad-brown-suspect-in-brendan-tevlin-murder-accused-in-2-seattle-murders-1.8973456) has an article that was updated on August 5, 2014. I then start to wonder, could this be a real event? However, I cannot report the author’s name or relevant information as the site states that this “This content is exclusive for Optimum, Time Warner, Comcast, customers with access to News 12” only. Nor can I ascertain the legitimacy of this article because of the media stranglehold by a corporate few.

So I then search the victim’s name, Brandan Tevlin, and discovered that a cloud based radio show – 99.5 PLJ discussed the tragedy. https://soundcloud.com/#wplj/955-plj-todd-show-brendan-tevlin-wplj  and a social media news feed called heavy.com (http://heavy.com/news/2014/06/brendan-tevlin-shot-dead-west-orange-new-jersey/) published an article entitled Brendan Tevlin: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know, by Matthew Guariglia, on June 27, 2014, that outlined the tragedy.

I read the article and there is a phone number for witnesses to call; I verify the phone number in the article and it does indeed go to the Esssex County Prosecutors Office. I also verified that Matthew Guarilglia has written several articles on current events at local and national levels. I am suddenly saddened that this is indeed an actual, awful, senseless, horrible event in our world. What I thought was an illegitimate piece of news reporting takes a sad turn and becomes true. My heart hurts for the family that lost their son, and I too have to think, “Why isn't this on all the radio and TV stations?” or rather "Who decides which murders the public at large get exposed to and which get buried in social media reporting?"

Blog 1 Influence of Media

What forms of new media do you use daily?

Ahh, let me count the ways: Facebook - to make sure that my virtual personal resume is well liked by my friends; Instagram - to ensure that my children's personal resume's don't collide with my carefully orchestrated Facebook page; email - I have to be the first to see the LivingSocial deals or know that Sperry Topsider has just released 200 new pairs of shoes; internet - for headlines and short sound bites so that I sound current and interesting while networking.

How has social media influenced your perspective of events?

I can be grievously incorrect about current events due to media's rush to be the first to report cutting edge news without fact checking. I can react emotionally, impulsively, and outrageously on a global platform without fear of judgement because the next distraction for my audience is only one and half seconds away!

I can also be aware of the world all around me - from the celebrations of the upcoming Oktoberfest in Munich, Germany to the devastation of an earthquake in Japan and the impending tsunami taking place now. These events unfold in real time, right in front of me, wherever and whenever I choose. They allow me to drink beer, offer prayers, donate money, or (most likely) do nothing at all.

Are these positive or negative influences?

The creation of a global neighborhood will allow us to break down prejudice as we become aware of other cultures (such as the understanding of the rich Mayan culture of the indigenous people of Mexico). However, sensationalism driven reporting can create intense and rapid prejudices as seen in Ferguson, Missouri.

A news media without accountability, or in the very least an unbalance presentation of events, can create ignorance and stoke the fires of raw emotions all for the price of getting the most re-tweets and hits. 

The true upside is that more people, globally, are aware of the world around them. We have global unity at our fingertips and, therefore, can perhaps lessen the disparity of income gaps, decrease infant mortality rates, increase literacy rates all by our ability to transfer knowledge, skill sets, interests, and financial support via new media.