History and journalism are interconnected; without journalism, crucial points in history worldwide wouldn’t be immortalized. For example, if it weren’t for Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein’s investigative journalism that uncovered the Watergate scandal, the American people wouldn’t have known of the corruption in the Nixon Administration. Perhaps, Nixon wouldn’t have even resigned. That may seem like an exaggeration but I believe that’s how important journalism and history are to each other. History sets the journalistic agenda and journalism defines what we the people deem as history, as important and as memorable.

As history moves forward, especially in this political climate, journalism I believe is going to become essential. People need to be informed about critical issues that affect their lives, and often these critical issues make history because they have the ability to have a profound impact. Of recent, a topic of concern would be the Trump Administration’s ties to Russia and the firing of FBI Director Comey; the investigation that journalists will conduct of this issue will define the future of America and what people will deem as timely.

News is necessary, at its most mundane and at its most earth-shattering. News is a mode of communication, because it informs people of issues that are vital to their daily lives. At least, that is what I believe news is. What is considered news now is blurry. Do I care that some celebrity got engaged to their long-term girlfriend? Probably not. Will my life go on without that news? Most definitely. But that is the type of news that captures so many people’s attention. It’s fascinating, really. And I don’t mean that in a patronizing way, I really do believe that that is fascinating. There are media outlets like Buzzfeed and The Daily Mail that make millions off of these kinds of stories, so there has to be some kind of palpability to what I would deign as pointless.

Throughout this class I’ve learned that there are some vital issues that everyone must be informed about, but in general, news is best individualized. I don’t enjoy reading celebrity gossip; I care about animals, food, culture, and the nitty gritty of politics, which are four topics that seemingly don’t fit together, but it shapes my journalistic persona. If I had a news blog, you would see articles about otters and articles about Bernie Sanders. To me, that is what news is. To someone else, news can be shaped by another set of wildly incongruent topics but again, to that someone else, those topics may be vital and the news about those topics must be told.

So I think news serves the important purpose of communicating necessary information to the public. What that necessary information is, however, is decidedly up to each individual person and how it is delivered and consumed is also an independent choice.

I think it’s best not to judge.

In an investigative piece by Buzzfeed News published on February 9th, titled “Making Her Case”, Tyler Kingkade delves into Laura Dunn’s life as both a sexual assault survivor and a force-of-nature sexual assault advocate.

After speaking out about her own traumatic experiences at UW-Madison, Dunn gained media attention for her activism. She now heads a D.C. organization called SurvJustice, which provides legal resources to campus rape victims and focuses only on the victims, which includes women and men. It aims to fight the victim-blaming mentality.

In 2013 alongside Nancy Pelosi, Dunn was able to lobby for and reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, establishing more rights for campus sexual assault victims. In 2011, Dunn helped create a federal directive dubbed the “Dear Colleague” letter, urging campuses to make explicitly aware the rights students have under Title IX if sexually assaulted.

Because of these legislative changes, the number of student complaints made in regards to sexual assault went from 11 in 2010 to 177 in 2016.

The culture surrounding sexual assault was able to change drastically, for the better, under the Obama Administration. Yet now, under the Trump Administration, Dunn is lost. She expressed that she is worried that all the work she has done may be in danger of unraveling completely under the power of man who has publicly bragged about sexually assaulting multiple women. 

She doesn’t know where the administration stands, although some outspoken figures from the Republican GOP and the alt-right movement want to shift focus onto “men” and the “lies” that they have to endure when accused.

Dunn’s organization SurvJustice has an annual budget of $160,000; the firm is small but effective, with influential connections.

What work they will be able to accomplish under the current administration is unknown, yet their creed will remain steadfast.

Bill O’Reilly is probably the most popular personality on Fox News, and Fox is aware of that. Amidst the recent resurfacing of multiple sexual harassment settlements against O’Reilly since 2002, Fox and O’Reilly have stayed quiet. Whether that’s to protect O’Reilly or the interests of Fox, is unknown.

In a Washington Post article published on Thursday April 6^th, Paul Farhi details that O’Reilly and Fox settled five sexual harassment claims at $13 million.

Since knowledge of these claims was uncovered last Saturday, there has been no comprehensive statement from O’Reilly, Fox, or Fox’s parent company. Farhi recognizes this as uncharacteristic of O’Reilly especially, referring to O’Reilly loud voice and louder opinions. In the past, when accused publicly of misconduct, O’Reilly has been vocal about defending himself, going so far as to publicly besmirch whomever deigned to go after him. That, however, is his First Amendment right, to protect himself and justify himself and his words.

Everyone in the U.S. has that right, so whether someone disagrees with his communication strategies or not, O’Reilly’s manner of expressing himself is protected by the United States Constitution.

So why isn’t he defending himself now?

Farhi figures that if O’Reilly were to publicly decry the claims now, he would basically be attacking his sexual harassment victims. However it’s interesting to note that since the story broke, viewership of The O’Reilly Factor has skyrocketed.

Perhaps O’Reilly hopes that the story will just lose steam if he keeps silent long enough.

No matter what, this story will remain intriguing, as these settlements were hidden from the public, including journalists, who often seek to uncover skeletons.

And one can’t help wonder, if the sexual harassment victims will exercise their First Amendment right and speak out about their experiences with O’Reilly.

That would be quite an interesting development.

This past Monday, March 6th Rabbi Mitchel Malkus received a bomb threat. In an opinion column for The Washington Post, Malkus detailed the terror he felt upon receiving a phoned-in bomb threat from a man spewing anti-semitic hatred. The man placed the call to the Charles E. Smith Jewish Day School in Rockville, Washington where Rabbi Malkus is head. He recounted the fear he felt for himself, his staff, and the student that he was responsible for. The school was thrown into a frenzy within minutes of the call; parents were panicked for their kids’ live and staff operated as crowd control while dealing with the debilitating awareness that a bomb may go off at any second. Students were faced with impending devastation on an otherwise normal day.

The bomb threat was fake. Though the emotional panic caused was irreversible. Further, the phone call Rabbi Malkus received wasn’t the first of its kind in Washington. Or even the country. Anti-semitic threats have been rampant lately, in schools and places of worship, areas that should be safe.

These type of threats are a form of terror, terror meant to create fear for groups that are marginalized. However, Rabbi Malkus noted that through this experience he and his community found motivation. A variety of religious and political leaders both local and national, and sympathetic community members, banded together to publicly denounce the hate-fueled religious terrorism becoming epidemic in the US as of late. Through this experience, Rabbi Malkus realized that where there is hate, there is also love.

What had meant to be a malicious act, the bomb threat proved to be an instigator of a community-wide discussion of the intolerance of anti-semitism and other religious persecution.

That kind of animosity has no place in their vision of America. Or mine. 

It is an uneasy time for the news media. President Trump has become somewhat of an enemy, or rather, a self-proclaimed enemy of news, the media, and anyone or any words that go against the grain of his administration.

Buzzfeed News reported Saturday that Trump tweeted that he will not be attending this year’s White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner. Buzzfeed News reporter Tom Namako has been tracking and updating the story within the past two days, drawing on the notion that his declination to attend could be a result of his tense relationship with the news media. It may be important to note that Buzzfeed News is among the many outlets on Trump’s “media blacklist,” making this report necessary and timely.

Namako recounted that Trump’s history with the White House Correspondents’ Association has been rocky since 2011, when he was “roasted” by both the then President Obama and comedian Seth Meyers for his controversial comments about the legitimacy of Obama’s US citizenship. Namako referenced fellow Buzzfeed News reporter McKay Coppins’s piece that covered this event and other events that have shaped the making of Trump’s public persona.

Also, according to Namako’s article the WHCA has maintained that they will still be hosting the dinner on April 29th regardless of the President’s attendance, as the dinner is meant to celebrate the freedom of the press given by the First Amendment, which is a supposed law of the land.

So, the irony of Trump’s impending absence is overwhelming.

On Friday February 10th, NBC Nightly News with Lester Holt aired a number of segments containing news stories that served as prime examples of the seven news values that were discussed in lecture.

President Trump was at the epicenter of that night’s reporting and the most controversial topic was, of course, his immigration travel ban and the effect it’s having on families in the US. This is an example of proximity; there are American children living in fear that their parents will be deported or rather, “taken away”, and they are dealing with the emotional fall out of that. We, as citizens, feel tied to this story because our fellow Americans are being negatively affected so the travel ban is of high importance to us as are the lives of these children. This story is also an example of human interest, because we as humans become invested in these narratives. We cannot help but take interest and sympathize with their pain.

NBC Nightly News also reported that night that Trump may revise his immigration executive order instead of challenging it in the Supreme Court. This is an example of timeliness, because it’s a news update on a popular, contentious issue.

Hello! My name is Ashvini Malshe and I’m a junior at the U of I. I study Media Communication and Spanish Cultural Studies. Due to my academic background, I’m required to use technology and media outlets to help my understanding of the world. As a result I consume a lot different media in multiple languages and this habit aides in shaping my opinions. My opinions are varied, and usually have a liberal leaning, but I’m always open to new points of view.

I’m also a woman of color, a child of immigrants, and a religious minority in this country. These circumstances affect my opinions but I find that my perspective is unique and has the power to have a positive influence on and inform those who may not otherwise be able to recognize my intersectionality. I believe that my voice matters now more than ever and it’s vital that I share my opinions. I hope that, with this blog for Journalism 200, I’ll be able make some sort of lasting, worthwhile impact on my audience. So here’s to that hope.