Amy's Blog

I-Guerre?

2006-04-27T12:39:00.000-06:00

The French are a people who are used to a strict and central authority from early childhood. Grievances, especially those of a political nature, often cause the French to be out in the streets rioting. With a history of such revolution, some of their most recent complaints have had to do with immigration, youth employment policy, and iPods?
A New York Times article exposed this "iTunes War," from which the French government would like Apple Computer to open iTunes files to work on players other than Apple's iPod.
Those opposed to the French's latest grievance argue that iTunes have helped to change the music industry, going from many illegal downloads to a program where people actually don't mind buying the music. Plus, each song costs .99 euro.
According to a professor quoted in the article, France has always tried to be tough on intellecutual property and all its new copyrights.
Austan Goolsbee, the author of the New York Times article, concludes that it is smply in the French nature to act as such towards an American entity:
"One reason may be that they have concluded France will never really compete. If the Internet will always have an American accent, why not go after it? Sometimes, the red flag of revolution is surprisingly hard to distinguish from the white flag of surrender...Sometimes the very people calling for revolution are the ones who end up losing their heads."

Proud to be

2006-04-27T12:25:00.000-06:00

There has been a lot of news regarding immigration lately, and I have been experiencing the process first hand. I have been applying for my American citizenship and visited the INS office this morning. The atmosphere was so hard to describe. People from all nationalities sat nervously waiting for their turn to be led through a closed door. When one person would come out, others near them in the room would look at them excitedly, both quizzing them on test questions and giving their congratulations.
While there continues to be a bipartisan debate on the immigration issue, I think it is important for people to understand that every single person has routes in immigration, whether its first or fourth generation. Would these people arguing against immigration feel the same if it involved their family members? America is founded on immigrants from Britain.
America depends on immigrants as much as they depend on it. I, for one, am going to be happy to call myself an American (when my application is finalized).

Hu Jintao

2006-04-20T10:03:00.000-06:00

One of my friends is in D.C. this week to protest the visit by Chinese Presidnet Hu Jintao. This morning on CNN.com, I read about an unidentified woman who was literally shut up by Secret Service Officals after yelling,"President Bush: Stop him from killing" and, "President Bush, stop him from persecuting the Falun Gong."
Though this woman (who has not been identified by the press) was not my same friend who is in the Capitol, CNN reported the embarassment that several former ambassadors and officials felt after this woman was shouting.
I don't know all about the liguistics of free speech on the White House lawn, but President Bush has had many protestors and demonstrations in his face while on diplomatic travels. Although she may have been interrupting the president's speech, I think it is terrible that government officials on the White House lawn would prohibit someone's freedom of speech. This isn't China and I think the government officials should have to simply deal with criticism, especially if it is public.

Fighting on World Affairs

2006-04-19T23:52:00.000-06:00

In the home stretch of the semester, it seems to me that often, teachers fill our schedules with busy work. One such assignment that I recently received was to attend one of the CWAs and write a broadcast VOSOT. I was planning on attending a few conferences regardless, so I picked up my CWA brochure and set off for Macky.
The first conference I attended was on Sirius Satelite Radio. Because of my interest in all things media-related, I was excited to see the developments of this industry. The three panelists began and all seemed to know a lot about the field. In the Q&A session near the end, the panelists were pretty much arguing. I was disappointed that this professionals were resorting to aggression to come off like their point of view mattered the most.
The following CWA panel titled "Bush and Blair, Brothers in Arms," wasn't any better. All the political scientists were very knowlegdable (two British, one American), but the ending turned into more of a "pissing contest" (for lack of a better term). Again, I was disappointed that each panelists thought that because of their experience with one of the heads of state, that they were more correct than the next guy.
My teacher should be suprised by my VOSOT...
I guess there's always next year.

Bad Rep

2006-04-11T21:43:00.000-06:00

I read a NY TIMES article from last week that was reporting on Duke's Lacrosse Team scandal. I was startled to read the following near the bottom:
"All of Duke athletics has now been drawn into the seamy domains of Colorado football and other college and university blind-eyeing of male athletes, veritably given license to rape, maraud, deploy hate speech and feel proud of themselves in the bargain."
This quote from an English and African-American studies teacher was shocking to me. While I'm not a strong supporter of any college athletics, it is disappointing to me that the actions of a few players can have such drastic effects (STILL!) for Colorado.
In the midst of Colorado's own scandal, I recall a friend saying that one of her professors told the class that their degrees were going to worth nothing. One sour grape ruined everything for the whole bunch. Hopefully, people outside of academia and the college scene will be a little more forgiving.

'The Real World'

2006-04-10T17:03:00.000-06:00

I was just watching 9News when they revealed that the next destination for MTV's The Real World after Key West, Florida, is Denver. After years of watching 18-24 year olds cry, drink, fight, embarrass themselves, and dramatize every situation, the crew is bringing it to Denver. The mayor of Denver commented on this exciting opportunity for the city: "This is a tremendous opportunity for Denver to showcase our cultural and recreational vibrancy to a very large, young audience," said Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper. "We are excited to welcome MTV and 'The Real World' cast members to the Mile High City."9News reported that the Denver cast will be living 1920 Market Street downtown. The building was formely the club, B-52 Billards.

Kerry '08?

2006-04-09T14:59:00.000-06:00

John Kerry spoke about his biggest regret in campaigning for the presidency in 2004: "I think the biggest mistake was probably not going outside the federal financing so we could have controlled our own message," said Kerry. He was speaking of limits and regulations that are set on contributions if a candidate agrees to accept federal funds.
The race for the presidency is synonymous for those who have the most money. Bush and Kerry, both millionaires from other interests, each raised more money than in any other race previously. Kerry commented on NBC's "Meet the Press" that he would decide by the end of the year if he would run again in 2008. With other senators McCain, Rodham Clinton, Feingold, among other potential candidates vying for the Oval Office, this race may be one of the most intense yet.

"Dajia hao ma?"

2006-04-09T14:40:00.000-06:00

First there was Google and Yahoo! accepting Chinese censorship regulations. Today, CNN.com reported that the Rolling Stones performed in Shanghai under strict, preconditioned circumstances to a crowd of8,000 mostly foreignrs. According to the news source, there was 5 songs which the government prohibited because of their suggestive nature "The songs were believed to be 'Brown Sugar,' 'Honky Tonk Women,' 'Beast of Burden,' 'Let's Spend the Night Together' and 'Rough Justice.'" Chinese rocker Cui Jian also joined the Stones on stage to perform 'Wild Horses.' He had been banned temporarily for performing after he performed an anthem of the Tiananmen Square march after the assassinations.
This concert shows that the Chinese may be opening up more than expected. Although the Ministry of Culture is still censoring, the Stones are a band who while being happy to perform, also are a group who likes to make political statements.

No More "Today" for Katie

2006-04-05T10:18:00.000-06:00

Katie Couric announced this morning that she will be leaving NBC's "Today" show for CBS's "60 Minutes," after 15 years. The move probably shocked none of her 6 million viewers, as speculation about her expiring contract with NBC has been in question for months. Couric will be the first woman to anchor "60 minutes." which is currently in last place on the evening news show ratings. I think it is important for people in broadcast to move on to different things, especially after a significant amount of time like 15 years. Katie has worked hard to achieve what she has in broadcast journalism and it will be hard to fill her shoes. NBC is currently debating between Meredith Vieira from ABC, Ann Curry, or Natalie Morales both from NBC.

Sirius-ly

2006-03-15T14:37:00.000-07:00

I have never liked Howard Stern, his show, or anything he has said. With that being said, I do understand he's need to defend himself in a breach-of-contract suit from former CBS executive, Leslie Moonves. Stern called Moonves "one of the biggest jerks on the planet" after appearing on CBS network's "Late Show with David Letterman." Stern moved from public broadcasts to Sirius Satelite Radio near the end of 2004. As student journalists, I think we need to be aware of federal regulations regarding broadcasting (even if it does involve Stern-related content) and the context of freedom of speech on television and radio.

Media Globalization

2006-03-13T18:05:00.000-07:00

Selling and buying newspaper companies has becomes big business in the news. The nation's second largest newspaper company, Knight Ridder, has sold twelve papers to a smaller company for an amount estimated at $4.5 Billion. So why aren't professionals in our industry scared? You could say anger is a better word to describe their emotions. Convergence not only allows different mediums to be owned and operated under the same company, but in some cases, buys a company out, and forces its employees to find new work. As if the industry isn't competitive enough already. Journalists also argue that big business in the industry is placing more emphasis on the money than on the job their trying to do. And let's be honest. Most people in the field aren't doing it for the money. The article from the New York Times discussed former executive editor of The Philadelphia Inquirer James M. Naughton reaction, stating, "he was dismayed that McClatchy was putting 'growth markets ahead of community responsibility.
This upsets me as a future professional in the journalism field.

South Dakota Ban

2006-03-08T19:46:00.000-07:00

There has been a lot of media hype this week regarding the abortion ban in South Dakota. Of course, the governor is directly challenges Roe vs. Wade and a test case is probably already in the works. It, however, may take years before that case ever reaches the Supreme Court, if at all. And what will happen then? During the nomination hearings of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, they were asked specifically about the Roe vs. Wade case and their opinions on it. The media is now playing on the fact that this historic case could be overturned. What they are not explaining to the American public is what overturning a case would actually mean. It does not mean that abortion would automatically become illegal everywhere in the United States. It simply means that decision would go back to state legislatures to decide their views on abortion. I think the media needs to do a better job highlighting this point. The ban in South Dakota is a big deal, but nothing needs to be blown out of proportion quite yet.

Information in the military

2006-03-06T18:22:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading a CNN article about how the family of former NFL player Captain Pat Tilman acknowledges that there is more to his death than they were originally told. Pat Tilman left his professional football career behind after volunteering to fight in the army. The military initially informed his family that he died in April 2004, after being ambushed by some existing Taliban in the Afghan mountains. A following investigation showed that not only did Tilman die from "friendly fire," but officials knew that he did "almost immediately" preceding his death. The uniform Tilman was wearing was said to have been initially burned because it was a biohazard. Army officials came back in a subsequent investigation and claimed it was burned because evidence had been collected from the scene of his death.
I think it is a terrible thing that the Tilman family is still in pain over the death of their son. Not only did they have to deal with losing him, but they don't even know how they lost him. Those who shot him should be held accountable, if necessary. The military also needs to understand the importance in delivering accurate information, especially regarding how someone died. It is not fair that there may be a cover-up to simply protect someone's actions in the line of duty. The access to free information in the military is not as easy to access for obvious reasons. No one can honor a soldier without first explaining why it is we are honoring him.

Re-Loyaling

2006-03-02T23:14:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading about the renewal of the Patriot Act by the Senate.
According to the article I read several moments ago, not only does the act contain verifications of the original docunment, but it now includes several provisions not even related to the War on Terror.
In doing so, Congress has extended the president's power and given up some of their own.
The vote was 89-10, with one senator not present for voting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bush Joke of the Day!!!
"For the first time ever, Republicans in Congress -- Republicans! -- are demanding to know the president's exit strategy from Iraq. Yeah, in response the president said I have an exit strategy, I'm leaving office in 2008." --Conan

Identity Soup!

2006-03-02T23:02:00.000-07:00

READ THIS: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/28/international/europe/28soup.html?ex=1141880400&en=4559583330ff138d&ei=5070&emc=eta1
This shocking article from the New York Times details the current debate in France regarding multiculturalism and xenophobia, boiled down from a soup. ‘Identity Soup’ is made in Paris out of smoked bacon, pig ears, pig feet, pig tails, sausage, and vegetables. A woman named Ms. Bonnivard, who identifies herself with an extremist right-wing group, started supplying the soup to the homeless in 2003. The religious significance of the soup (Muslims and Jews do not eat pork) soon dawned on Bonnivard and other extremists, who explain that the soup is a connotation for the exclusion of non-European immigrants living in France and elsewhere. These immigrants, Bonnivard concludes, are expending ‘scarce resources’ that do not originally belong to them in the first place. As both word of mouth and the Muslim riots spread at the end of last year, the French government decided to intervene and wouldn’t allow Bonnivard to set up her stand due to ‘discriminatory nature of the soup.” Despite several appeals and prohibitions between Bonnivard’s group and the police, pork eating rallies and nationalistic rallies continued in Paris today, with supporters reclaiming their Christian French identity and stating, “We’re not yet living in a land of Islam.” Similar pork-eating demonstrations have gained supporters in Nice, Strasbourg, and into Belgium. Members of the racist and anti-Semitic the Front National also participated in the protests.

Right-wing extremists, like the Front National, have gained support in past elections. Inflammatory opinions from these parties have been gaining support throughout Europe, particularly because of their immigration and ethnic/religious platforms. While most people are able to be tolerant of others, questions of who belongs in Western Europe are not only shown in this article, but also in party politics. Especially following the publication of cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad, the French are maybe pushing some buttons a little too far.

You Slacker!

2006-03-02T22:58:00.000-07:00

Although it looks like I have been slacking on my blog, the following posts were written and saved as drafts earlier in the week.
My apologies,
Amy

The Invention of Civil War

2006-02-27T19:04:00.000-07:00

I have been reading many non-Western news sources to get their perspectives on world issues and specifically issues involving the United States. I was most interested in Al-Jazeera, a channel infamous for airing several bin Laden tapes and that has a viewer base equal to that of BBC. Today, the website featured a story on a joint prayer session between Sunni and Shite Muslims in Iraq, organized by the association of Muslim Scholars. The article delivered the blame to the US, as an effect of the occupation of Iraq and and a cause of persistent tension between the two sects. A civil war in Iraq would be disaterous to the stability in the region.
Al-Jazeera seemed to deliver accurate coverage of both the Arab world and other regions. Ultimately, I was suprised by the content on the website, and even more suprised by how 'independent' the network came across to its readers/viewers (i.e. they had a code of ethics under the news category). I searched for a code of ethics on CNN.com and BBC.com and didn't find one (if anyone does, I would be interested in reading them). Is it that they are extremely dedicated, perhaps even more so, to ideas of freedom of information, or is it that they are trying to convince the public that they are?

Fog of information

2006-02-20T17:46:00.000-07:00

I recently was assigned a essay in one of my political science classes. Standard essay, 6-8 pages on a topic of my choice but relating to coursework. I have heard the fuss over teachers at CU refusing to allow students to use Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia with entries sent in from people all over the world. I have never, however, specifically had a professor warn me away from it.
Teachers have come to accept that students are going to use a plethora of online sources for a few years now. The convenient and access of the Internet has allowed everyone's life to become that much easier. Long gone are the days of searching for catalogued books in Norlin stacks. Welcome to the information age.
In this specific era, information is easily accessible, and now, just as easily changed. Wikipedia has become a pinnacle example of such, allowing readers to not only search a million English entries, but to edit, delete, and reword them as well. Wikipedia, nothing more than a blog of information, has actually become a credible source in education.
Combining free speech in this digital age is a difficult task for one to ensue. People should respect the amount of free information and take it for what it is. On the other hand, the information age has caused us to not trust anything other than official government or organizational websites. Text encyclopedias have made mistakes and those have remained credible, public sources. Who are the credible gatekeepers of information? Whose side is one trying to tell and can they do it without adding in any biases? Who says that the person studying Russian ballet or the man living in Hong Kong isn't more credible than an encyclopedia publisher editing copy in his New York office?
I think that professors, students, and the general public should take Wikipedia as they would treat any other blogs (including this one). It's one person's interpretation of a topic and that other sources (as a good journalist would know) are necessary in getting any information correct.

Pink Panther

2006-02-17T09:14:00.000-07:00

Round 2

2006-02-16T13:58:00.001-07:00

And speaking of the secrets within our executive office, a Federal judge ordered today the President Bush release documents on its warrantless wiretapping program. The Judge citied the Freedom of Information Act and asked that the documents be released within twenty days. The Freedom of Information Act requires that the federal government release documents upon the public's request. According to informational website, this act has brought cold war plots and underground government business into the spotlight. So the count down begins...will the administration deliver? The whole domestic wiretap issue is reminiscent of the Nizon /Watergate situation. Hopefully, the media will place enough pressure on the government so that they deliver.

He Will Hunt You Down

2006-02-16T13:27:00.000-07:00

Dick Cheney told Fox News reporter Ben Hume that he would never forget the hunting accident the injured his friend. It is hard to believe that anyone would or even will in the near future. Media reports have not only been detailing extensive coverage of the accident, but also highlighting the amount of time between the accident and when the media was informed. The White House didn't release the information. It was the ranch owner who decided to call a reporter friend the next day. The Vice President's public image has been very reserved over the past six years, and White House officials convinced him to grant the media an interview to smoothe things over.
Now the administration is being confronted with questions of their secret nature and people are wondering (again!) what else they are hiding. I do not think that the hunting accident is a big deal until put into a larger context of this administrations untruths on everything from WMDs to Osama himself. The media is a watchdog of politicans in modern age, and I think they are making a good point about the timetable and freedom of information being released.

Stones

2006-02-08T19:47:00.000-07:00

The SuperBowl Half-time show draws many people to their televisions, even those who aren't the biggest football fans. After the shock of seeing a breast in performances years past, restrictions were made not only on the actions, but the lyrics of this year's performers, the Rolling Stones. Not wanting to provide millions with any more 'wardrobe malfunction' type excuses, the show was delayed by five seconds, though the ABC network claims that arrangements were made prior for adjustments to the show. With the band in agreement, the NFL prepared to turn down the audio for any unsuitable lyrics.
Censorship of the media is something that is debated by scholars and students alike. Although the United States may pride itself on having the most free media in the world, the convergence of media companies is only allowing for those freedoms to slowly disappear. But back to the football game- do people really care if Mick Jagger doesn't sing a few words in one of his performances? The media was trying to make a point after the fact that the show was censored BECAUSE of Janet Jackson's mishap two years back, when in reality, huge live performances like this have always probably been censored due to the large audience (about 1 billion worldwide). When I was reading the top stories following the SuperBowl, the article regarding the Stones' censorship was one of the first. Let's not make a big deal out of nothing...
Fun fact: Did you know that they wouldn't let anyone over the age of 45 on the field while the Stones were performing?

More Cartoon Violence?

2006-02-08T19:12:00.000-07:00

I am dismayed by the spread of violence caused by the publication of a cartoon around the globe. The offensive depiction of the Prophet Muhammad has not been taken seriously enough but those in the west. Violence has spread from Beirut to Kabul and some protestors have been killed for entering a U.S. Base in Afghanistan. Danish and Norwegian missions have been burned, as well as the Austrian embassy in Iran. The European Union has condemned the violence, but offered no apology for its actions. The violence has now spread to other parts of Africa and South East Asia. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stated today that the cartoon is being fueled as anti-Western propaganda in countries like Syria and Iran. People on both sides of the issue need to understand that they are each dealing with different ideologies and beliefs before a 'Clash of Civilizations' occurs...
In terms of ethics, one may have a hard time deciding who is right and who is wrong. Clearly, those in the West may have no regret in publishing what they did because they have more freedoms of speech and press than a lot of Islamic based societies do. They should be able to express their opinion without being reprimanded for it. However, with so much tension already built up between Americans/Europeans and Muslims in other parts of the world, continual violent protest is not going to help the situation on either side. The cartoons were published in September and many sources cite a group of Danish Muslims for going to the Middle East to exaggerate the cartoons and spread the word. Both sides need to reevaluate the freedom of religion versus the freedom of speech before making any action.

The Ethics of Censorship

2006-02-02T23:44:00.000-07:00

Two days ago, I read an article that discussed the unveiling of Google in China, which cesnors the websits returned in a search. Users are informed when certain sites are unavaliable to access and similar laws pertain to some European countries. Again citing Chapter 2 of Convergent Journalism, Online Journalism refers to an immedicacy in retreving many forms of media- newspapers, radio, ane television broadcasts. People in China could have access to many Western ideas, culturally and politically, that don't parallel their own values. Here, ethical questions are raised. One could argue the matter of ethics isn't present, with the Chinese government dictating what is right and wrong. I think this article makes for interesting discussion on the differences in journalism in the U.S. and the rest of the world. Perhaps we take our first amendment for granted...

Offensive Cartoons

2006-02-02T22:44:00.000-07:00

The controversy over a cartoon originally printed by a Danish newspaper may now turn violent in the Middle East. The cartoons depicted the Prophet Mohammad in derogatory ways. After hearing about the cartoons, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates stopped selling Danish goods and demanded an apology from the EU. Then on Wednesday, news spread to the Middle East that various French newspapers had also published the cartoons. Today, Palestinian gunmen in the Gaza Strip shut down the EU's office and threatened to take European hostages unless there was an apology from the EU.
The whole situation escalated very quickly. At first it seemed like there were going to be more diplomatic solutions to the situation, with some nations in the Middle East implementing embargoes on European goods. It is a shame that countries in Europe were not as sensitive to the Muslims, especially in France, with their ethnic-fueled riots ended only a few short months ago. It is also too bad that this has the potential to become yet another violent conflict.
These cartoons also raise many ethical questions regarding the orginal publication. According to Chapter 2 of the class text, Convergent Journalism, newspapers are portable and permanent. If a paper is printed and distrubuted, no changes can be made and readers hold the information in their minds. The French newspapers probably published the cartoons because they knew that they would sell more papers. However, the lack of sensitiviy allows one to believe that they knew it was wrong to publish them.