In October 2005 news stations in Boise, Idaho received an anonymous tip that Jim Kimball, a 39-year-old referee at a hockey rink who works with children, was a registered sex offender. The ABC news affiliate Channel 6 wasted no time in airing this story. Meanwhile, CBS news affiliate Channel 2 wanted to research the story further, which meant waiting until the next morning. Channel 2 reporter Thanh Tan was assigned to the story, and found that in 1992 a then 23-year-old Kimball was charged with statutory rape of a 15-year-old girl*. However, the judge dismissed the charge three years later, which Channel 6 never mentioned in any of its broadcasts. None of the other news outlets covered Kimball’s story except for Channel 6, who took advantage of their solo spot. They heavily focused on Kimball’s story for the next several days, calling it “exclusive breaking news”. As a result Channel 6 received countless awards and a significant increase in viewers.

The big question then, is this: which news station made the correct decision? Tan believed it wasn’t worth displaying Kimball’s youthful mistakes to the public. However, Channel 6 news director Scott Picken argued it’s the responsibility of a news outlet to inform the public of a potentially dangerous person to the community, regardless of when the crime was committed and its legal outcome. He reiterated his stance in his blog.

I believe that Channel 6 mishandled the Kimball story in their desire to beat the other news stations in the ratings. First, they reported the story without all the facts. Kimball was a registered sex offender, but Channel 6 called him a convicted sex offender. Second, they never contacted Kimball to get his side of the story. Worst of all was that they portrayed him as a depraved child molester, by modifying his picture to make him look scarier and juxtaposing his mug shot with a video of young children ice skating.

Channel 6 was skating on thin ice (pun intended) with this story, because with the exception of #2, they nearly fulfilled all five criteria of libel, according to our Inside Reporting textbook (p. 140)

1. Statements must be false. Channel 6 called Kimball a convicted sex offender. They also made him look like a child molester.

2. Statements must be defamatory. Kimball did plead guilty to the charge of statutory rape, and according to the AP Stylebook, the question isn’t whether the challenged statement is literally true, but “substantially true” (p. 357). Therefore, it’s not quite considered libel since Channel 6 didn’t erroneously attribute a completely different crime (e.g. murder) to Kimball.

3. Statements must be published. Channel 6 focused heavily on the story for days.

4. Plaintiffs must be identifiable. Kimball was identified early on, and his picture was shown many times on the air.

5. The defendant must be at fault. Channel 6 never contacted Kimball, the presiding judge of his case, or anyone else to get the other side of the story.

At the same time however, I can’t help but question the NPR broadcast itself. Considering that Tan produced the segment, it’s rather one-sided. Naturally, she would want to show her news station in a positive light, as the “good guys” who took the high ground against their competitors. I would have preferred for a third, non-involved party to have produced the segment. Just as Channel 6 is guilty of misrepresenting Kimball as a depraved child molester, Tan portrayed Picken as a judgmental, ratings-hungry director, concerned more with the aesthetics of the newsroom rather than proper reporting procedures. Furthermore, while Tan did interview Kimball and his wife, she portrayed them in an overly sympathetic light; she noted that Kimball cried for days when the story broke and that his wife was crying during the interview. However, she never interviewed anyone at the ice rink or the children’s parents. She also never talked to the presiding judge of Kimball’s case, and not to the girl involved.

*A November 2006 article written by Tan revealed that Kimball and the girl flirted with each other for a few years and eventually had a sexual encounter. Her parents prosecuted him when they found out.

A few months ago Games for Windows magazine announced that it would stop its printed media and focus on online content. For some people, this was a major sign that print magazines are becoming extinct. But then again, I’m sure that’s what a lot of people said about the radio with the coming of television. True, television did take a lot of radio’s audiences and perhaps more people watch TV than listen to the radio. However, radio didn’t go the way of the dinosaur. Instead, it adapted. People still listen to music, especially on the way to work (you can’t exactly watch TV while driving!). Stations became specialized, offering country music in one station and jazz the next. Several years ago radio evolved once more with the advent of satellite radio. Now you can listen to a lot more variety on the radio, even comedy skits.

Similarly, print media has adapted over the years. Prior to the internet, the biggest competitor to newspapers was television. After all, it’s more interesting to watch the news live rather than read about it the next day. Yet newspapers are still around, because like radio they’ve had to adapt. They don’t exactly offer breaking news, but offer in-depth articles, which is something you don’t get from a 45-second snippet. Now online media is a threat for many of the same reasons. However, I think that once again print won’t be going anywhere. Sure, there are folks like me who like to get their quick Yahoo news, but there are many who like to take the time to relax and read over breakfast. My boyfriend’s parents read 2 newspapers every morning, and even go through the trouble of hunting for them if their local store runs out.

a) Do the news items reflect immediacy?

Yes. Not only is there a date of when the website was last updated, but there is a timestamp on when it was updated and when stories are published. However, the timestamp appears only for “hard” news stories, not features.

b) Does the site try to help readers save time?

Overall, yes. Since CNN is one of the world’s largest publications, the homepage contains a lot of material. However, they are arranged in a tidy, easy-to-read manner. First of all, there’s a large colorful banner on top announcing any developing, highly important news. The body of the page itself contains all the most important aspects above the fold, such as the top story, links to latest stories, and videos. However, there is also a large ad on the right side, which may be distracting to readers.

The home page is visibly divided into chunks and columns. The first chunk contains most of the elements I just mentioned, plus some links to a few feature articles slightly below the fold. The next chunk contains links to the other sections of the paper, such as Entertainment, Travel, Business, and Sports. Each section provides one or two links to specific articles. The rest of the chunks in the body contain even less important aspects, such as weather information, blogs, and CNN’s business partners. Meanwhile, the rest of the column is composed of features such as polls, videos, and of course more ads.

c) Is it quick and easy to get information?

Yes, because the links are colored blue, which stand out from the white background. Also, it’s also due to the relatively tidy design of the home page.

d) Does it provide both visual and verbal information?

Yes, every story contains at least one photo, and some stories are accompanied with a video.

e) Do the stories contain lists and bullets to make them easier to scan?

Some of the longer stories have a “story highlights” section at the top, which break it down into 4-5 bulletpoints.

f) Are the stories broken into “chunks”?

Yes. Paragraphs are short and easy to read. Unlike traditional newspapers, web pages don’t force stories into narrow, long columns. Therefore, a paragraph with 3 sentences will often only be 4 lines long.

g) Do stories provide hyperlinks to additional information?

Yes. Some stories have links embedded in the story. Others have links to related or similar stories at the bottom of the page.

h) Are there opportunities for readers to “talk back”?

No. Only the blog section allows comments from readers.

i) Does the site use multimedia to enhance understanding and add appeal?

As I mentioned, there are many opportunities to watch videos on the CNN website. There are also podcasts.

I used to run a film review blog. It was small and was just a fun little hobby. One day I was on Technorati checking out the websites that linked to me when I discovered that someone was stealing my reviews. This person had set up a “website” that was nothing but a bunch of Google Adsense ads and people’s stolen articles. It turned out that he/she was using a software to scrape our stories from RSS feeds. While some people only make a small part of their articles available on RSS, I had made all the articles available in their entirety. This may be more convenient to people who use RSS readers, but clearly it can be abused by thieves.

I was angry. Not only was this person publishing my articles in full without giving me credit, but they were being used to bring in revenue. What made things worse was that this person was in a different country, where copyright laws are different. Fortunately the person agreed to take down my articles (after telling me that I gave him/her permission to use my reviews by providing the entire posts on the feeds!), but he/she didn’t learn anything from this experience. Some time later I revisited that website to find stolen Yahoo articles. Today that website is gone, and good riddance.

Karen Hart, 123 Hill Hall, says the professor, George O.T. Jungle, has touched her during tutoring sessions in his office and has invited her to his apartment several times. She said she declined his invitations. [This whole paragraph is libelous for several reasons. The statement is defamatory to the professor since it ruins his reputation. The accuser is named and her address given out. The accused is named as well. The events that occurred between the two people are unverifiable since no one can prove what really happened between them.]

“I am having trouble in the class and I have to go see him to get help with my papers and projects,” Hart said. “But I am scared to go in his office now.”

Jungle denied having any improper contact with the student and threatened this newspaper with a libel suit if it published the story.This shows negligence, and even perhaps malice, by the newspaper and the reporter. They were already threatened with a lawsuit if they ran the story, but they did so anyway.]

Hart said she is thinking of filing a formal complaint with the university.

“I don’t know how to do that,” she said. “I don’t know what to do.”

—————————————————————-

Sexual harassment allegations are very serious and can have severe consequences for the accused and the organization to which they’re attached. Frankly, if I were an editor, I would be very hesitant in publishing a sexual harassment story, even if the identities of all parties involved were kept confidential.

First of all, I would only publish this story if both sides express their consent. The original story states that the professor would sue if the story was published, which means that he didn’t give consent. However, if he did give consent and tell his side of the story, I would publish it but carefully omit the identities of the parties involved.

The student said she was thinking of filing a formal complaint with the university. I think that the story would hold more weight if it were written AFTER she filed her complaint. Instead of relying completely on just two people’s shaky accounts, the reporter now has a concrete source to back up its story.

- If I were in this scenario, I would read the documents on her desk and follow up on them on my own. I wouldn’t completely rely on just those documents as sources or evidence. Since she felt comfortable leaving them in plain sight, especially in front of a reporter, I would presume that they aren’t confidential and damaging to her career. Stealing the documents is illegal, and I wouldn’t actually start opening up her desk drawers to look for more documents.

Scenario 2: Going undercover in a nursing home

- The book says that it’s acceptable to go undercover if you’re investigating a possible social injustice occurring; therefore, if I were assigned this story, I would go undercover as an orderly to find out if there’s any funny business going on at the nursing home.

Scenario 3: Using other people’s quotes for your story as if they were your own

- Absolutely not! That’s plagiarism, pure and simple. I’ve been a victim of plagiarism in the past (someone stole my articles and posted them word for word on their website) and would never do that to another person. Always give credit to the original source, regardless of where that source came from (including the internet).

You know something’s wrong when the word areola appears in a bill circulating on Capitol Hill.
(Source: Newsweek)

2.) Scene-Setter Lead
This lead was a good example of the scene-setter because we can easily visualize this scene described.

In a dimly lit back room on the second level of the University of Michigan library’s book-shelving department, Courtney Mitchel helped a giant desktop machine digest a rare, centuries-old Bible.
(Source: CNN)

During one game, Stenhoff rammed his head into the ball carrier’s chest, cracking his vertebrae. He didn’t graduate with his class is and is now trying to get his diploma by taking correspondence courses.

Sadly, Stenhoff is not alone. Every year 20,000 young people are injured in high school football, 12% of which lead to permanent paralysis. Thirty-five percent of the injuries occur to the neck or head. Some are even fatal, with 13 deaths in the last year.

Stenhoff isn’t bitter about the accident though, but just remorseful.

“I knew the risks involved when I decided to play football,” he says. “I wish I would have known just how bad it could be.”

It’s not unusual to see high-level characters helping out low-level characters on quests. Often the high-level storms ahead and slaughters everything, while the low-level runs to catch up. The problem is that the altruistic high-level is actually doing a disservice to the low-level. First, it robs the low-level the chance to learn how to play that class. Some may argue that they have many chances between now and the level cap to learn, but it’s important to learn as early and as much as possible. Second, doing all the work for low-levels cheapens their experience with a quest if they just blow through it.

To paraphrase a Jerry Maguire quote, help them help themselves. Let them actually kill some of the enemies. Feel free to lead the way, but don’t plow so far ahead that when they get to where you are, you’ve already killed everything. And when you get to the boss, don’t tell them to stand back. Let them get their hands dirty.

Naturally there will be some situations when it’s preferable to blitzkrieg through quests. That level 18 may be someone’s third character and would like to get to the level cap as quickly as possible. Maybe you’re only level 25 and are helping your best friend catch up so you can quest together the rest of the way. Barring such exceptions, actually helping out a low-level, instead of just acting as their killing machine, will benefit them in the long run.

Last week my boyfriend and I were in San Francisco exploring and allowing ourselves to get lost. We were surprised to find that it was warm to the point that we had to duck in a store to buy a large bottle of water! We weren’t the only ones to notice the change in weather. We found a family-run ice cream shop that sells homemade ice cream, and there was a line of people out the door. In spite of coming from a hefty dim sum lunch, we joined that long line and enjoyed some tasty, fresh ice cream.

In my apartment complex we have two swimming pools and lately I’ve been seeing people there more often. Several times people have had full-blown pool parties, complete with music and drinks. Rest assured, I’ll start taking some dips in the pool myself soon enough!