Analytical Memo: Classmate pitches for Independent Media

For the last few weeks of my Independent Media course at Ithaca College, my classmates and I came up with our own pitches for an independent media product. We performed these pitches to each other, and the students who were not giving a pitch were instructed to pretend they were a board of stinking-rich directors who were potential investors for that particular project. Professor Cohen would even yell out, "Pass the caviar!" periodically, to remind us to stay in our snooty characters' mindset. After each pitch was given, we asked critical and realistic questions about the constructed plan for the project, as well as gave some suggestions to strengthen the pitch.

This exercise was a vital way for us to realize the reality of creating our own independent media. It was also a template of how to start thinking of the costs we would run into, and therefore brainstorm for potential revenue sources.

There were some awesome ideas, ideas that I actually believe would be very very successful if my classmates were to be ambitious. My two favorite ideas were The Police BEAT, and ManualFocus.com.

The Police BEAT would be a non-profit service that would both report on police brutality as well as function as a anonymous tip-line for citizens who were victims of police brutality. It would begin in NYC and would investigate cases of reported mistreatments from the NYPD. One service of the website would be a Yelp-styled map and review of police departments all throughout the city. It would provide reviews and cases of particular cops. I liked this idea because of my own particular passion for both outing the corruption and racism within current policing systems, as well as dissecting those same issues within incarceration. The planned layout of The Police BEAT was user friendly, and had a legitimate plan for gathering user contributors or tips, investigating these sources and stories, and then creating a final report. To market The Police BEAT, the creator wanted to use Facebook and Twitter to go viral and utilize hashtags and the visual effect a photo has on both of these social media platforms. My suggestion to the creator of The Police BEAT was to add a tab about the rights citizens have, and what they can do in a legal sense if they feel they are being harassed by the police. In this sense, it would also be smart to have a legal professional apart of The Police BEAT's team, as well as advertise public policy lawyers on the site for revenue.

ManualFocus.com would be a non-profit website that would function as an advanced Instagram that had an emphasis for teaching basic photography skills. The website would be picture based, almost like a website version of a Instagram, that would be separate the photos into categories via a tagging system. If the viewer found a picture they liked, and wanted to take something similar, they would click on the photo and a short description consisting of what camera was used, and what the camera settings were would pop up. I would love to use this website because I own a DSLR, but don't feel very confident with messing around with some of the camera settings, such as those that change the amount of light let into the lens or the speed of the shutter. I would use my camera in more of an artistic, and professional way if there was a website that would teach me how these settings affect the image. I do believe there is a huge audience for this type of website, and as mentioned in class- it would also be a great app for a smart phone. I could imagine it would be a tough website to manage- from observing the users of the site as well those who are posting pictures. However, it would be a great place for advertising to bring in revenue if the advertisements were as photogenic as the pictures on display.

My personal pitch was for a two-part documentary that would explore the differences of gun culture in different regions in the United States. By examining the gun culture and the way citizens are sensitized to guns, I want to see if there is a relationship between gun access and gun violence. For example, in rural communities in which families own many guns for hunting game, is there more or less gun violence because of the way a gun is valued by that family.

Long Live Izzyness!

Last night, April 28th, Ithaca College's Park Center for Independent Media hosted its sixth annual Izzy Awards. The Izzy Awards recognizes amazing journalists who chose to involve themselves whole-heartedly in independent media outlets for the greater good of mankind.

The two receivers of the award this year were John Carlos Frey and Nick Turse. John Carlos Frey is a fellow with the The Nation institute. His beat is focusing on the violence occurring on the U.S.-Mexico border, a place he calls home. One of the most important things about independent media for Frey is the ability to take the time necessary for a story. Mainstream media must report to make a deadline. Frey told the audience about taking a whole year to find a vital piece of one of his investigative pieces. It was a video (that was merely rumored about existing) an eye witness took of a brutality of a Latino man being accused of note having a green card. It took him a full two years to put together this story with all of the needed evidence, something that would not have been permitted in mainstream media.

However, once Frey had the completed story in a package ready for TV news, all of the mainstream outlets he pitched it too wouldn't take it. Frey's struggle with network news was a platform for him to talk about the censorship of important stories in network television, the censorship of the stories that do not fit the politics of the corporations that fund the networks (wait aren't they suppose to be objective?! ha ha).

Nick Turse is currently a managing editor on TomDispatch.com and published a book in 2013 titled, Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam. The book featured classified Pentagon documents as a lead towards systematic violence against Vietnamese civilians, and was put into context through personal interviews. When asked about the difficulty of both exhibiting the emotion and also remaining somewhat distant from the emotion in stories (such as those described in his book) Turse commented that although there were days when his mental state was in the worst shape of his life, he found journalism to be very "therapeutic." He said that there were times he felt guilty, asking the interviewees to relive the most tragic experiences of their life, but his purpose was to retell these stories in the most dignified way, so as to create change.

Something special about this years Izzy Awards was the first induction of journalists to the I.F. Stone Hall of Fame, for journalists who continue year after year to produce content to win the Izzy Award again. It was of no surprise to anyone that those journalists were Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill.

Glenn Greenwald was one of the first recipients of the Izzy Award, but deserved to be recognized again this year for his work to expose NSA surveillance with Edward Snowden. Although Greenwald couldn't make it to the ceremony on IC's campus, he filmed an amazing speech that touched on the function of independent media, and what kind of leaked information makes journalists be considered criminals.

Jeremy Scahill produced a film after his book, Dirty Wars: The World Is a Battlefield and it was nominated for an Oscar this year. Scahill's passion and wit makes him a very enjoyable public speaker, and he spoke about the corruptions in the government and mainstream media that try to suppress important stories.

Notable quotes from the evening:

Jeremy Scahill: "Nobody in their right mind would hire me. So I had to find someone in their left mind."

John Carlos Frey: "TV news can make you hate your friends, and love your enemies."

John Carlos Frey: "Journalism really isn't a career- it's a burning in your heart, it's a way of life. It's the most incredible tool for justice."

John Carlos Frey: "Remain open and vulnerable to the emotion of the story."

John Carlos Frey: "Journalism is NOT always two-sided… Someone is getting shit on and someone is doing the shitting."

Nick Turse: "The most important question to end an interview with: who should I talk to next?"

Jeremy Scahill: "You can tell a lot about a country by looking at who's in prison and who's on a book tour."

Comcast, bad dog!

These past two weeks in both my Independent Media, and Government and Media classes, media consolidation and net neutrality have been intertwined in our conversations.

One of the big names that is inevitable to be mentioned when talking about these topics is Comcast. Comcast is the world's largest mass media and communications company by revenue - at a whopping $62.5 billion dollars. Additionally, it is the largest cable provider and internet service provider in the United States. So yeah, Comcast is one of the top dogs in control.

As a concerned citizen and a promoter of maintaining net neutrality, I was excited when I came across an article dogging the top dog Comcast.

The article starts with a disgruntled Comcast customer who is upset because of his lack of internet service in his own home. The customer is a web designer and estimates that he has lost anywhere from $500 to $1000 because of time he has to spend dealing with his lost internet connections. Although he has reached out to Comcast several times, he has to use his iPhone as a hotspot or go to a local cafe to use the internet.

The article then continues on to mention Comcast's campaign to convince Congress to let them take over Time Warner Cable for $45 billion dollars, saying that it will benefit both companies as well as the customers.

The customers disagree.

David Cohen, Comcast's executive vice president, states that Comcast is aware that it has trouble delivering a quality service to its customers, he says the company is working on it. But is seems the customers aren't believing Comcast's barks:

"You are seriously everything that is wrong with the world," a Seattle woman with the handle Kate J. wrote in October on the review site Yelp. "I am 100% sure you are run by Satan himself. I feel confident that you are responsible for cancer, homelessness, war, suicide, 9/11, and every darkness in the world." 

The article continues on with horror stories from customers who have complained about not being able to depend on Comcast's services in times of great need. One couple lost all internet service with Comcast, even though they depend on using the internet for the wife's chemotherapy computer. Another family told a story of a time they were robbed but couldn't call 911 because their phone line had been disconnected. The website, Consumerist, awarded Comcast with the title of "2014 Worst Company in America."

A merger of Comcast and Time Warner will control 40 percent of all broadband access in the U.S., and most importantly in locations where it will be the ONLY choice for broadband (no competition).

Net neutrality and why it's super important

Net neutrality - the idea of having a free and open internet - is very important to me. However, Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner Cable, and Comcast (the internet service providers, or ISPs for both wired and wireless) want to disband net neutrality because they claim there is too much traffic on the internet. This traffic is the fault of "bandwidth hogs" who are slowing services with downloads and internet television. 

This article explains the idea of a "fast track," and a "slow track" that the corporations would create. The internet would essentially be divided like cable TV in which customers would have to pay for the websites they want to use in the "fast track." If they don't want to pay, or more importantly - can't afford to pay - for the services, then their internet connection will be extremely slow. 

In 2012, Free Press and other organizations created a mockumentary titled, "The Internet Must Go." It is a 30 min film about a man named John Wooley, who was hired by the ISPs to convince people that net neutrality was a bad thing. 

Wooley interviewed leaders of organizations, senators, and even the creator of Reddit to get a better understanding of the importance of net neutrality. Some of the organizations got their start by creating a simple website that went viral. They explained to Wooley that this wouldn't have been possible if net neutrality didn't exist, because start-up websites and personal blogs are too small to appear on the corporations internet cable lists. One of best quotes from the film was from the president of TheColorofChange.org who said, "At the end of the day, America works best when all of its voices are heard." 

In my opinion, one of the biggest misconceptions about net neutrality is that it is needed because there is only so much bandwidth. However, the pipes and wires that create the internet space is NOT a finite resource. In fact, if the ISPs invested more money into their services, we would all have extremely fast internet. 

Currently, the American broadband infrastructure is ranked 28th for speed and other services on the list of developed countries. This is embarrassing! We are suppose to be one of the most advanced countries of the world, built on a document that declares freedom. Instead we are prisoners to our capitalistic mindsets that don't allow for development. 

I have two main issues with the idea of not having net neutrality for our country: 

• First, I understand that the meaning of the word "free" in "free and open internet" does not mean that customers shouldn't have to pay for their internet services. ISPs do provide the infrastructure that is needed to be able to surf the web, write a blog, or watch hours of YouTube videos. However, it does ensure me the right to free speech. Also, the ISPs don't own the rights to my creative content of free speech.
• If the ISPs are allowed to charge for one's free speech, then it essentially creates censorship for those who can't afford to pay extra for their internet services. This idea preys off of the economic inequality in our country, and states that if you can't afford to purchase freedom then you don't deserve it. That makes me sick to my stomach. 

IC Weekend Update

In celebration of Seth Meyers's visit to campus, Dom Recckio and I made our own IC Weekend Update. Here are tonight's top stories:

I Walk the Line: Between Journalist and Activist

Walking the line in the journalist's case is not to be confused with Johnny Cash's idea behind his song "I Walk the Line." Although the song is cherished because of his distinct voice and the infamous chord progression, Cash sings about walking a straight line of decency by following the rules.

It's not that journalist's shouldn't follow all of the rules, I just believe there are times in which the journalism field requires outliers that are willing to break the rules, or the journalism norms, to shed light on injustices. But I am talking about the line between journalism and activism that in some nonprofit organizations might seem a bit hazy. Are the issues that nonprofit organizations choose to report on in the best interest of the public, or the donors? Or do they themselves have a particular agenda that sways their reporting?

David Carr (one of my all time favorites after watching Page One) wrote an article in the NYTs titled "Journalism, Even When it's Tilted,"that where in instances in which American mass media doesn't cover some topics, nongovernmental organizations - some with agendas - are filling those voids. However, Carr brings up the question of "who is a journalist and who is an activist, and can they be one in the same?"

Kevin Davis from NetNewsCheck.com wrote a similar article titled, "Greater Scrutiny for Nonprofit News?" Davis too has heard the question of whether or not mission-driven organizations that do not have a steady cash flow and rely on donors can "sustainably and ethically perform the core public accountability functions of the fourth estate." 


Davis concludes his article with the standard that all non-profit news organizations should mention any individual or company that donates over $1000, so then readers know where the support is coming from. Davis writes:

By adopting clear and practical editorial independence policies, coupled with an unwavering commitment to transparency, nonprofit newsrooms can avoid the inherent risks in accepting philanthropy to produce much needed and valued public service and investigative journalism so desperately needed in a free democracy.

The most important part of that quote to me is calling reporting a "valued public service" that is "desperately needed." One of the reasons I decided to study journalism is because of the impact good reporting can have on an issue that I might be passionate about. However, if I seek to report on an issue I am passionate about, is that expressing a type of activist bias? 

In the previously mentioned NYT article, Glenn Greenwald is quoted saying a statement about journalists that I immediately wrote on a sticky note and hung above my desk. He said, "All activists are not journalists, but all real journalists are activists. Journalism has a value, a purpose- to serve as a check on power."

The day you can't trust anyone- not even the internet or the media

A few minutes are left on the clock for one of my favorite and most dreaded days of the year, April Fools' Day. I am a prankster, tried and true, but only because I was raised in a household whose mantra was: prank or be pranked.

Ever since I was young, my parents have gone over the top for April Fools' Day. I don't mean your classic toothpaste in Oreos or plastic wrap under the toilet seat types of pranks - they are in a whole other league. Some of the highlights include: 

• Convincing my middle school to create a fraudulent report card with failing grades and remarks such as "Bethany talks too much and is too boy crazy."
• Getting in cohorts with the local police station to steal my car while I was at an evening dance class
• Pretending my dog was lost, and told me I had to go find her. I found her. On our roof.

They're cruel, but they're geniuses. This year my dad started my day with a text that seemed like a white flag of surrender…

But later in the day, it turned out he and my best friend who is currently studying in LA, and interning with Ellen, joined forces to try to convince me he was going to be on the Ellen show. 

However, my parents aren't the only ones I tip my hat to on April Fools' Day. Media venues have a great history of being involved in the holiday. Also corporations create hilarious (and always almost believable) videos or ad campaigns in attempt to trick the masses. 

Here are a few of my favs for 2014, complete lists from Salon and Mashable

• Netflix added two documentaries in which you can watch bacon sizzling or a rotisserie chicken cooking
• Google Maps created a new type of maps in which users can find Pokemon. "Gotta catch them all?" If you do, you can become Google's very own Pokemon Master
• Google+ offers a feature in which David Hasselhoff photobombs your pics
• YouTube claimed to have insights of what video viral trends were going to occur in 2014 (such as clocking and dad kissing)
• Jimmy Kimmel invents a spray on yoga pant
• Twitter announces to users the creation of the "Twitter helmet" a helmet that users can wear and Tweet from (imagine google glass but instead of glasses, a giant bird head)
• TripAdvisor tries to send users to fictional locations, such as Mordor or the Death Star

Some Buzz on Buzzfeed

I'm a news junkie as much as the next journo, the only difference is I'm willing to admit that my day isn't complete without spending at least a little time catching up on news, and then catching up on the silliness of Buzzfeed. I just can't avoid the overwhelming need to read lists about why Harry Potter movies are more magical than I ever imagine, or taking a quiz about "Which Late Night TV Talk Show Host Are You?" (which btws, I got Seth Meyers and cried crocodile tears of pure happiness).

However, I have started to notice both on Buzzfeed and from articles in other media sources that the site is looking to rebrand itself as a stop for both amusing gif-filled lists, random quizzes, and - ACTUAL NEWS.

Buzzfeed's steps to become a source for credible news and investigative reports first caught my eye in early February, but apparently the site began evolving in 2011 with the hire of Ben Smith, a Politico blogger. Recently it's added bloggers and reporters from ProPublica, The LA Times, and The Indianapolis Star.

Then, yesterday I read an article about Buzzfeed's tactic to use it's lists to incorporate breaking news events. By creating lists of photos and graphs that break down the complexities of world news topics, readers can connect and understand the news story in a different way.

Luke Lewis, editor of Buzzfeed UK says:

The […] content "is not viral", Lewis said, "but the important thing is to do both". While the more detailed coverage gives that added depth and understand, the image-led list approach can serve to engage a new audience to the news story, Lewis said, who may not otherwise have clicked on more typical reports.

Lewis's point just gave me another reason to spend time on Buzzfeed. Perhaps some of the users don't typically engage with news topics, so perhaps they will be more inclined to read about breaking news if Buzzfeed is making it accessible for them.

William Jacobson, Legal Insurrection: One man's "going viral" journey

On Tuesday we had a speaker in our Independent media class. Every student enjoys a class period dedicated to a speaker because it means we can put off our assigned reading for another few days, not have the anxiety of being called on to comment on the class readings, and ultimately the speaker usually has a cool story to tell.

William Jacobson was no exception. Jacobson, a law professor at Cornell, shared with us his tale of how he started a legal and political blog called, Legal Insurrection.

His story started with a political argument he was having with a friend, that led the friend telling him he should write a blog. "What's a blog?" Jacobson asked his friend. Today, his blog has about 30,000 visits a day… LOL to that rags to riches story.

Jacobson brought in some baby pictures of his blog, pictures that resemble mine and my classmates blog today. We all recognized Google's Blogger template he was using, although thankfully those templates have now been updated (so hopefully our's look a little cooler). But it was amusing and inspiring to know that he started in the same place as we are.

In my opinion, the best advice Jacobson told us was how to connect with other blogs and bloggers. Whether that means sending your own writing to other similar blogs who might appreciate extra content (always put a link back to your blog at the end), or linking to other blogs in your pieces - and hoping that they too will link back to you. In both instances, you are being exposed to a new readership, and the other blog is also being exposed to a new readership, we call this a win-win scenario!

Jacobson also touched on how he keeps his blog updated, even though blogging isn't his primary job. Updating posts on a blog almost every hour is vital, otherwise readers won't keep coming back to check for new content. Legal Insurrection has a staff of 12 contributors, and Jacobson admits to never meeting any of them in person. They are all paid contributors; their paycheck depends on their role.

Legal Insurrection's viewership will depend on events occurring in society. Jacobson said their true climb to fame happened during the George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin case. Because of Legal Insurrection's in depth description of legal elements, and investigations on statements made by main stream media- the blog was trusted and visited by readers often.

Indy's New Paywalls: Cooler than the NYT's

I've grown up in a generation who expects the internet to be free. And- not saying I do or condone those who do- there are ways to get content that is suppose to be paid for, for free.  Therefore, if you put my generation in front of a paywall, we will be able to get around, under or over it without spending a dime (sorry NYT).

I think some independent media sources are on to this. As a media platform that is expected to be on the cutting edge of technology and internet dissemination, these sanctions are used to thinking a step ahead.

Instead of having a paywall for content, some have created a paywall for special benefits. Democracy Now! has a special they call "Dinner & Show with Amy Goodman" in which an avid fan can pay (a hefty price) for dinner with Amy Goodman, along with the chance to watch a live broadcast and get a tour of the studio.

The online magazine, Slate, has also added a similar service. They call it Slate Plus, and for monthly or yearly subscription ($50 a year, $5 a month- not bad at all!) readers will have access to writers and special events that non-paying readers do not have access to.

I think this is an awesome idea. I would definitely consider paying for an experience to help support my favorite media source. It is like paying extra for backstage passes. Time will tell, but I think it's a very viable idea and a great way to solidify a fan base.

Indy Media Madness

March Madness, the NCAA tournament is in full stride. I'm not a huge fan of watching basketball, but I will spend sometime enjoying the game this month because of March Madness. It is my first year making a bracket, and the added element of guessing which team will win has definitely made things more exciting. It's just the beginning but I must say I'm not doing too bad!!

As I was creating the tournament bracket, I began to think of a structure within independent media that is very similar… This might seem like a stretch but bare with me:

Both the March Madness tournament and an independent media outlet have a goal that is to be reached. In the NCAA tourney, its the W on the final game. In the media outlet, it's a completed story with all the facts, sources and narrative coming together to report an issue or event.

Then comes the bracket or the teams competing for that final spot. Without the aspect of competition, the bracket within independent media is like crowd sourcing for a story.

Crowdsourcing is not only one one of the unique aspects that sets independent media apart from mainstream media, but it's also one of the most important features to keep independent media alive. Independent media platforms are more small scale and typically don't have the connections that corporate media platforms have. So, it must reach out to it's readers for either information, or for someone to attend an event that the main editorial board can't attend. This connection is not only outreach for places that the indy media can't attend, but it also forms a bond between the platform and it's readers. They feel more attached because they can be part of the product.

So the bracket is like the readers, sending in either facts, sources, tips, critiques, etc…. to the writers of the story which then can create a final product (which if the story is a great piece than in the indy world it is just as great as a victory in a championship game).

An example of an independent victory was when two bloggers posted evidence that "60 Minutes" used forged documents when reporting on President Bush's Air National Guard service. One of the bloggers said his secret was "open-source intelligence gathering… We've got a huge pool of highly motivated people who go out there and use the tools to find stuff."

*Blogger's edit:

After further conversation with Professor Cohen about liking independent media crowd sourcing to March Madness, he brought up another similar element:

I think an even simpler March Madness comparison is that in the old days, people just watched the games. But now, in the Internet era, people feel they participate by making brackets, debating, competing with each other about the winners.

Professor Cohen, brings up a good point. Not only are we watching the games or consuming media, we are participating, sharing, and in a way- competing (race to get the story first).

C.R.E.A.M., the anthem of Indy Journalists

C.R.E.A.M or Cash Rules Everything Around Me, formally known as an anthem of the hip hop artists- the Wu-Tang Clan- can now also represent independent media creators' struggle to produce in-depth investigations while remaining uncontrolled by corporate media.

Ever since I told my parents (both of whom work in the medical field) I wanted to become a journalist, they have stressed to me the competitiveness of the market.

"It's going to take a lot of work and a lot of luck to have a job in the field in which you can make a comfortable lifestyle!" My dad says to me constantly.

With the pressure from my parents, and the presence of corporate media everywhere I looked I use to think that options for my future were slim. And never did I consider that perhaps blogging could be a viable choice for an aspiring journalist…

Don't get me wrong, I use a lot of independent media blogs to get my news. But I always assumed that the lifestyle was not a primary source of revenue. As a consumer of news and an avid internet user, I expect to get information for free! So if I'm receiving information for free, where would the revenue for these bloggers come from?

Of course there's advertising. But beyond that- there is something much more special.

Fans.

Independent media sites, bloggers, freelance writers, investigative journalists have all discovered that if they produce factual, just, and influential writing about topics that their readers or fans are passionate about- then their readers will want to support them to do more of it.

For example, Shane Bauer, a journalist who was imprisoned in Iran for 26 months is now using a platform called Beacon to raise funds for his investigation of the American prison system. Bauer is known not only for his imprisonment but also for his writing, and therefore could gain a lot more attention if pairing with a corporate media platform. However, he in confident in his readership that he can do the project independently with a little help with funding.

Because of Bauer and other indy news sites- I'm more confident about the C.R.E.A.M. lifestyle of the investigative reporter. Perhaps paying for content is in fact something of the past- but supporting the content you want created- seems to be indy media's cash money.

Whistleblowers: The sound-makers in a time of silence

Both the names Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning (formerly Bradley Manning), are enough to spark up a controversial conversation about what qualifies as free speech. Responsible for exposing some of the most top secret injustices of governments and wars, some thought Assange and Manning actions were evil, not noble.

However, no matter what people think about these two whistleblowers, the truth is the knowledge they uncovered was shocking. In an article from Truth Dig titled: Top 10 Ways Bradley Cooper Changed the World is a list of secrets Manning exposed, and in turn provided the appropriate spotlight to generate change. The most well-known example is the Collateral Murder video where a helicopter opened fire on unarmed non-combatants in Iraq, two Reuter journalists, and children. This video really gave a visual, and undeniable truth of what was going on when US troops were stationed in Iraq.

The Collateral Murder video was released on Wikileaks, along with with the U.S.'s relationship with Yemen's dictatorship to hide our bombing strikes there, and the Obama's administration's pressure on nations not to bring to court Bush officials for torture.

Like other independent media creators, Assange and Manning believe in shedding light on topics that mainstream media either won't cover, or doesn't have the capabilities to cover.

My "Aha!" Moment with Independent Media

Prior to sitting through an Independent Media class, I thought I had a pretty good idea what independent media was. I knew independent media sources were separate of big media corporations, but as a mostly mainstream news consumer I wasn't fully aware of the importance behind the independent media's missions.

Mainstream media corporations have an economic attachment and loyalty to their advertisers that can completely dictate which stories are reported to the public and which stories are hidden from the public. The stories also will come with an underlying narrative that remains true to the partisan of the owners/ advertisers of the corp. Although it is known and accepted by the public that mainstream media contains biases- Fox News being the extreme conservative source and MSNBC being the extreme liberal source on the spectrum- I have never truly taken the time to realize what this means for journalism and those who use journalism to remain in power.

As the course continued on, I began to meet journalists and bloggers who defined the type of journalist I wanted to be. Someone who had concrete ethics, a never-ending attempt to be bipartisan when reporting the facts, and a constant drive to make the world a better place by giving voice to those whose cries for help can't be heard. Also, I never forget journalism's purpose as the fourth estate- providing a critical eye on the government we elected to run our nation. If the media that promises to provide this critical lens, secretly reports only stories that they are paid to report, the fourth estate is completely powerless.

During another class, Hip Hop Cultures, I stumbled across a passage in the book, "Hip Hop Wars," by Tricia Rose. The passage was written by scholar Ben Bagdikian:

Media consolidation (source from 2012 but has edits) is one of the major issues with mainstream media corporations. Not only do those previously mentioned loyalties become more and more powerful, but also other issues such as net neutrality are brought to the battlefronts. 

Although this blog is required for my Independent Media course, it also is a record of my journey with independent media.

-Bethany