Journalism has a lot of power and influence with the public. Journalism wouldn’t be what it is today without previous muckrakers and activists paving the way. It is important to look back at history to understand how it has shaped journalism.

I believe one of the most important roles journalists can have is setting the agenda, like Streitmatter said in Chapter 17. We have to look at people how journalist have set the agenda in the past. Although journalism has its’ own news values (timeliness, oddity, prominence, conflict, human interest, impact, proximity), it is important for journalists to decide what they want to report and talk about as well. What they choose to report and say can really set the agenda and have an impact on the rest of the journalism, but also the public.

An example mentioned in the book is, how in 2009, journalists were very supportive of same-sex marriage rights. Although I was pretty young, I remember seeing various news articles at the time showing their support on the topic of same-sex marriage. My family would even discuss the topic at the dinner table. I thought it was just very amazing because it really opened up the conversation with the public. It had people talking and really normalized and helped people understand and learn more about the topic. These journalists really set the agenda and helped pave the way for same-sex marriage to eventually get legalized in the United States.

With that being said, it is also important to note how journalists have broken from the pack of other journalists. We need to really look at journalists who have pushed bounds but also differentiated themselves. These powerful journalists also help pave the way for change and impact on the public and the rest of journalism.

Shattered Glass was a good movie overall. It really emphasizes the ethics and values of journalism.

Stephen Glass was a very complex character but I think that the actor portrayed the character well. Because of the stellar acting, I felt quite attached to the character. In the beginning I really liked Glass, he was charming and intelligent, but as everything unraveled and went south, I really felt embarrassed and bad for him.

Whereas the character was well portrayed, I wish the movie offered a little more insight and answers to why Stephen Glass did what he did. Why did he feel the need to lie so much and fabricate so many articles? The movie alluded to certain things, but never gave a very clear answer to that.

I believe that Citizenfour was the best and most accurate portrayal of the Edward Snowden story, in comparison to other Hollywood remakes. Snowden (2016) seems lack luster in comparison to Citizenfour.

Citizenfour was good at portraying the character of Edward Snowden himself. I believe that America often sees Edward Snowden as a bad guy, a snitch/ whistle blower. However, this documentary tends to stray away from that depiction of him. The movie portrays him more as someone who is thoughtful. He explains his decision making processing, showing that he contemplates between what he thinks is right and wrong.

There were times where I had to remind myself that it wasn’t just some made up story, but something that really happened. Citizenfour was very thought provoking in the sense that it really gets the audience to think about their security and privacy. Citizenfour was brilliant.

I’d like to start off by saying I usually don’t like older movies and All The President’s Men came out in 1976. Going into the movie, I thought that I’d dislike it and find it a drag but I was proven wrong.

I believe that All The President’s Men portrays journalism accurately. Hollywood usually glamorizes these types of movies and make them action-packed and unrealistic. However, I think this film stays true to what journalism really is. It’s not always 100% intense. A lot of it is waiting around and being patient, working at investigating and looking for evidence- slowly putting pieces together to stay true to the truth. However, the film did have its dramatic and thrilling moments too. I think the film portrayed the Watergate situation in a very unique way. The actors really portray their characters well and brought the Watergate situation to life. Great movie.

When I personally think of journalism, I think of news. There is a lot of emphasis on news because it’s seen as recent and important events. I do think news is important but there’s just too much breaking news coverage sometimes that it ends up taking all the space and room in journalism.

In the movie Spotlight (extra credit movie), the journalists had to drop everything they were doing and their big investigative piece to cover 9/11. Although 9/11 was a big event, why does it have to mean that their piece about sexual abuse and molestation in Catholic Churches has to have less importance? Even after 6-9 weeks after the event, the journalists felt like they could not resume their original assignment. I believe this example can be applied to many real life journalists and journalism situations. A more recent example would be the presidential election and coverage of President Trump. Everyday in the news, it never fails for me to hear something about Trump. On January 21st, the Women’s March took place. However, journalists were covering pieces on Donald Trump and how he was reacting to the public’s claims on his inauguration crowd. This can be due to one of the news values, prominence/ impact.

Journalism is powerful in the sense that it has the power to change people’s perspective and opinions. However, we place so much emphasis on the value of prominence. It is unfair that someone with prominence or a topic with impact will overshadow all the other news topics. News is important, but so are other “smaller” topics in journalism. It is important for not only journalists and editors, but the public to relook at what they value in journalism so they don’t overlook other critical events and stories.

Spotlight was crafted beautifully. It was full of suspense and offered a lot of insight on the corruption, molestation, and sexual abuse in Catholic Churches. It also showed a side to how stressful and difficult investigative journalism can be, especially when you’re fighting against many people who want to cover up the truth. Spotlight also depicted how not only journalists are accountable for bringing stories to light, but also the public, lawyers, victims, people who know the perpetuators, etc. It was inspiring, showing how powerful it can be if everyone came forward and stepped up, telling their story- revealing the real truth.

I believe Spotlight accurately portray many raw emotions. I could feel the hurt and pain, scarring, from the victims, when they spoke about being violated. I could feel the frustration and toll it took on the investigative journalists not being able to prove and find all the missing pieces. I could feel the crumbling inside and disbelief of the long-time Catholic followers when they found out about the sexual abuse from priests. Spotlight captured every side of the story and in the end I was left in awe.

Living in the age of social media, businesses need to have a strong social media presence in order to reach more consumers. Businesses can also use social media for branding and new product and campaign promotions.

1. Instagram

Instagram has become a huge social media platform for not only posting image content, but also marketing and advertising.

There is a variety of ways a business can advertise on Instagram- photo ads, video ads, carousel ads, and stories ads. In these various ads you can tap on it or swipe up and the ad will link you to a company’s website. Or left and right for more information on new products and offerings.

Companies can choose for their sponsored ads to pop up to certain area codes, or to a whole target audience based on things such as age, gender, interests, etc. This is perfect for a variety of establishments, whether you are a small, local company, or a big, corporate company.

2. Snapchat

Many millennials use Snapchat as a way to communicate and connect with friends. However, many businesses have evolved Snapchat into a way to advertise to young consumers.

Not only can you advertise on Snapchat through stories like Instagram, many businesses create their own interactive features.

Geofilters, which uses geo-tagging, may be designed and purchases by businesses. This can create a more personal connection with consumers based on location. Lenses use facial recognition to create fun filters and content.

Businesses can also have their own channels on Snapchat. These channels are updated daily with new themes, and content to keep up with current events, holidays, pop-culture, etc. happening. They can also put links to their website.

3. Facebook

 Similar to the way Instagram advertises, Facebook also does sponsored ads based on consumer insight such as gender, age, interests, etc.

Although Facebook is another outlet for advertising, many businesses use Facebook as a platform to post their own content. Facebook reaches to a larger audience because, I mean, come on, who doesn’t have Facebook?

Posting your own content on Facebook is much cheaper than paying for a spot on Instagram on Snapchat. It is also easier on Facebook because your posts will show up on other newsfeeds if their friend comments or likes your contemt. You don’t have to spend a dime, unless you decide to “boost” your page or post.

Businesses can also make the most from Facebook by messaging and commenting to interact and communicate with consumers. Responding to consumers’ inquiries and comments can create a stronger presence on social media, but also improve customer service.

4. Twitter

Twitter doesn’t seem as popular or wide spread as the other social media platforms due to the limit in the number of characters and such you can use in a post. However, don’t underestimate Twitter’s power.

Twitter also has promoted tweets, promoted accounts, or promoted trends. Businesses can choose whether they want to promote a certain tweet, or their account, or be placed on one of the trending hashtags.

Aside from promotions, businesses can also post shorted video clips and images. Twitter also has the ability to link followers to your website. Although there’s a limit on characters, it forces businesses and companies to be short, witty, and straight-forward with their posts. This optimizes the virality of posts and replies.

For example, Denny’s and Wendy’s twitter responses have gone viral due to the sarcastic and humorous replies they’ve had to both consumers and other competitors. This has created a huge social media presence, but also improved customer service through quick communication.

No matter what platform a business decides to use, they have to be proactive about both posting content and interacting with consumers in order to build a strong social media presence.

In the Washington Post, David A. Fahrenthold investigates all of the donations to charity President Donald Trump has made between the years 2009 and 2016.

In the Post, it releases all the sources it contacted. It contacted over 400 charities with ties to Trump, taking several months to do research. It includes quotes from past Trump employees and previous interviews the Post has done with Trump.

“He spent years constructing an image as a philanthropist by appearing at charity events and by making very public — even nationally televised — promises to give his own money away,” said Fahrenthold.

Trump oftentimes points out how he gives a lot of money to charity. I admit, I’ve always believe that this facade was true due to the vast amount of wealth he has. One of the things that made Trump seem the most charitable was his very own Trump Foundation.

In the Post, it said, “Tax records show the Trump Foundation has received $5.5 million from Trump over its life, and nothing since 2008. It received $9.3 million from other people.”

It was appalling to read these figures. Trump was put on this pedestal for being generous and giving, yet his own charity foundation was mostly funded by other people and their donations.

“The Trump Foundation’s largest-ever gift — $264,631 — was used to renovate a fountain outside the windows of Trump’s Plaza Hotel,” said the Washington Post.

Not only is the majority of the foundation not Donald Trump’s own money, but he uses it for personal purchases such improving the design of his own hotel. The money is supposed to be used to charitable donations, but instead is used on something that will benefit Trump’s own profit and gain.

Fahrenthold’s investigative journalism allows readers to see another side to Trump that was well-hidden from the public, making Trump more transparent than ever.

In a recent New York Times article, Adam Liptak responds to President Donald Trump’s recent tweet towards them.

Trump tweeted, “The failing @nytimes has disgraced the media world. Gotten me wrong for two solid years. Change libel laws?”

The article says that Trump cannot change libel laws because it is a state-law tort after New York Times v. Sullivan. But nonetheless, Trump wants to try to change them anyways.

Trump expanded on the idea of changing libel laws in person. Trump said, “I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.”

I found Trump’s statement quite ironic. As many people may know, Trump recently made accusations about former President Barack Obama wire-tapped Trump Tower. The FBI have investigated and found no evidence that Obama wire-tapped Trump Tower. However, Trump was very vocal about these assertions on twitter, comparing the situation to Nixon/ Watergate, and calling Obama a “Bad (or sick) guy!”

What Trump said about Obama can be considered as libel in a way because he made false, defamatory remarks. It was also published on a huge social media outlet.

Therefore, the fact that President Trump wants to change libel laws because he believes that the New York Times writes negative and false things about him is ironic, because he did something similar.

He also has a monetary motive, noting that he can “win lots of money,” (not that he is lacking in money anyways).

In a New York Times opinion column, Stacey Patton calls for African American parents to stop beating their children.

Patton starts off by sharing an emotional and powerful anecdote from her childhood about how she was beaten by her adoptive mother.

Her story helped her argument and call for action because it displays her personal connection and experience with it. It also helps the reader depict the situation and how scarring and painful it may be. Patton begins with a very strong pathos appeal to grab the reader’s attention.

“Today, black parents are still about twice as likely as white and Latino families to use corporal punishment on their children.”

Patton then goes on to explain how many African Americans believe they are successful because they were beat as a child, which allowed them to avoid jail, drugs, etc.

Like Patton, I disagree with this. I do not believe that success and beatings as a child are positively correlated. If beatings kept African Americans out of jail, then why is mass incarceration and police brutality so relevant today?

Patton points out that before slavery, whipping and beating children was not a parenting tool. In West African cultures, there were no physical punishments for children because they were viewed as “sacred and pure.” Europeans were the ones who thought that children were “born in sin,” and were beat to get the devil out of them.

“The truth is that white supremacy has done a masterful job of getting black people to continue its trauma work and call it “love.”’

I understand that many parents beat their children because of “tough love”, and discipline. However, in today’s society, African American children go through enough already. With police brutality and mass incarceration, parents should be protecting and loving their children, not hurting them.