| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: Are J-Schools Out of Touch? |
Topic: Are J-Schools Out of Touch?
| Author | Message |
| seamus.mediabistro | Posted – 10/3/2008 1:35:10 PM | show profile There's a interesting story that's been stewing for the past couple weeks about an NYU J-school student's "embedded report" for the PBS blog Mediashift, where she essentially criticizes NYU's for not keeping up with the evolution of new media in their curriculum. Check out her piece and some of the follow ups, and let us know your thoughts. Are journalism programs out of touch? http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2008/09/embedded_at_nyuold_thinking_pe.html http://mashable.com/2008/10/01/alana-taylor-heritage-media/ |
| mkelly | Posted – 10/3/2008 1:40:23 PM | show profile I'm sorry... when exactly were they *in* touch? |
| Grateful Deadline | Posted – 10/3/2008 10:53:38 PM | show profile The writer says she's "the only blogger in the room." What should this tell her? I teach part-time at a journalism school. My classes are for upperclassmen -- juniors and seniors. On the first day, I give them a questionnaire so they can tell me about themselves. One of the questions asks what they do on a computer. The answers invariably come back: e-mail friends, check Facebook and MySpace. A few mention that they also use Google to find information or check CNN. One of our current plagues is that the majority of students -- most of them from about 20 to their early 30s -- have difficulty composing sentences, dividing their work into paragraphs, writing in the third person, sourcing their stories, adhering to AP style and even more basics. Don't ask me how they made it so far into college with these deficits; it's a mystery to every instructor teaching upperclassmen. But it's a fact, and the choice becomes: Which is more important, sending them out of this university able to Twitter and blog, or sending them out able to write a factually accurate, coherent paragraph? To me, the choice is clear. My school exposes students to new media, and instruction in new media is required, but as much as we'd love to run with the wolves, our first responsibility throughout the program is to ensure that our students have a thorough grounding in the basics. The world already has enough twits Twittering, and it doesn't make sense to teach them to run before they can walk. There is a longstanding tradition in journalism that some things are best learned on the job. Mastery of new media is one of them. Other considerations: -- Funding for public j-schools is not going up. This year, it was slashed -- another lovely effect of the mortage meltdown. -- The process of adding courses takes years; the arc of the latest technology does not. For example, if a course were proposed today in blogging, by the time it was approved, media may have abandoned blogging and the course would be irrelevant. We're already seeing the abandonment of blogs as the revenue-generation experiment doesn't always succeed. -- The AEJMC, which accredits journalism programs, rescinds accreditation from j-schools with antiquated programs. So what do I think of the student's "report?" I think it's very young. |
| DCAflyer | Posted – 10/4/2008 2:29:29 AM | show profile that last poster did a great job defending journalism schools. i'm thoroughly impressed and on board all his/her points |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 10/4/2008 2:48:30 AM | show profile The article really derailed at the point it said, "Obviously, I am being a bit facetious here, but the truth of the matter ..." because at that point I was lost about what the j school was actually covering. |
| rozwrite | Posted – 10/5/2008 1:12:19 AM | show profile | email poster I agree with Grateful although it does depend on the school. I teach at a private j-school and just got my proposed fashion blogging course approved for a quick ,intensive run in January. Yes, there are problems with students being able to source stories, write complete sentences or even spell check. Most don't read, which makes it tough to learn the writing process. The emphasis is still on basic journalism skills-interviewing, reporting and writing tight stories on deadline. A lot of students protest this practice as old school but they are mostly the ones that never become journalists. A blogger isn't the same thing. |
| MediaCupCake | Posted – 10/5/2008 3:16:24 AM | show profile Agreed I agree with the above. I believe what's being taught in J-School is certainly valuable fundamentals, and more. But mostly, I'm just tired of hearing about this young woman's silly blog post. Ugh. I think all of this "new media" attention she has given herself is going to go to her head. |
| mkelly | Posted – 10/5/2008 9:54:43 AM | show profile OK, now that I've read this chick's post... 1. Like others here, I too am sick of this girl, and I've read her post only once. It's more of the same old, same old: young up-and-comer complains that his or her instructor doesn't get the ways of the modern world, and just wants to skip the grunt-work in favor of the bold new thing. This is no different than Julius Caesar growing tired of Crassus, or those jackasses 10 years ago who said newspapers would be extinct by 2000-- and then lost their jobs in 1999. Yawn. 2. Like... well, mostly like me and nobody else here, I'm sick of these instructors too. A journalism course in reporting on Generation Y-- are they serious? For f's sake, reporting is always the same; only the means of reporting change. The faculty should be teaching *how to report*-- how to piece together ulterior motives, how to ask difficult questions, how to handle pressure, how to write compelling copy, how to see a story in the whole. Let the Gen Yers do whatever it is they do to publish their news about and to other Gen Yers; they know that stuff better than me anyway. I just want them to give me good copy that I can use to build a revenue stream. I think it's almost cute, the way these journalism schools churn out eager, wide-eyed newbies all set to cover the world... and then like so many other hiring editors, I put them on the obit beat, or the calendar desk, or the sewer-project watch. Bigger follows better, and their first job is to demonstrate they can do the job better. If they can, I have big things in mind. But when they come into the working world, my first concern is that they have the intellectual curiosity and trained eye to be a good reporter. And one more thing: when this chick complains that she's the only one in her class of 16 who has a blog-- she overlooks the possibility that maybe her other 15 classmates are just lazy goofs taking a gut course. I mean, it's NYU rather than Columbia, but that's still a very strong possibility. |
| Marie | Posted – 10/5/2008 10:44:16 AM | show profile Couldn't agree more. Go to J-School to learn how to report and write (you'll likely never get edited to that extent again). Columbia offers a new media workshop, but it comes on top of the reporting and writing basics. It certainly makes sense to take advantage of every opportunity to learn as many new media technologies as possible (it will help on jobs), but to complain that your classmates don't have blogs? |
| tynansanger | Posted – 10/6/2008 5:32:33 PM | show profile | email poster I personally am shocked by the uniformity of the response on this discussion board, and this uniformity seems completely out of character for a website dedicated seriously thinking about the media. I am a member Taylor's generation (and I'm pretty sure I'm the only person who's posted so far who is), and from my perspective, what she has done is completely innocuous to the NYU teacher and a fair assessment of where j-school stands. I was seriously considering J-School after graduation, but everyone who I spoke to said don't go. Most of the responses I got not only mentioned the lack of career doors that J-School would open, but also made the point that going to J-school may actually hurt me in the media job hunt, as publications would see me as a privileged kid looking to pay for media connections. As someone who's just entered the media profession, one of my greatest strengths is my savviness with new media (I'm on at least 10 social media sites including Twitter, Facebook, and Digg), and that in part is what landed me my first job. At the same time, there are some older editors who actively hate any and all new media, and would not hire me at all even though they probably need someone like me to stay solvent over the next two years. The single biggest generational gap between my generation and the ones before me is what we consider private information. Blogging on the details of a class seems completely innocent to people under the age of 25, as would posting a picture of a social gathering on Facebook or publicly blogging about personal relationships (even if in vague terms). To those over 40, however, blogging about the details of the class is an incredibly invasive and outrageous act, which explains most of the subsequent controversy. I am as baffled as to why there is a controversy as I'm sure older j-school professors would be baffled as to why I don't understand. At the same time, I think Taylor was right to point out just how overhyped our generation's supposed investment in media can be. The vast majority of my friends are not on twitter, and a significant number haven't updated their Facebook profiles in months or years (and I'm probably more likely to have friends who twitter, considering that I flock to people interested in the media). I agree that people need to know how to write, and I've worked hard to keep up my grammar and clarity in an age of instant publishing. But there is a difference between good blogging and good newspaper and magazine writing, and the differences between them become especially pronounced over the generational divide. That there still exists an institution where people pay upwards of $40,000 a year to become educated on media practices that are at least 20 years out of date is particularly pathetic, especially considering that most of the old fogeys who rigidly adhere to those practices will be out of a job soon. |
| mkelly | Posted – 10/6/2008 6:35:54 PM | show profile Tynan, please quit confusing skill with new technologies and mastery of how to report. They're entirely different things. That's what older editors worry about. I couldn't care less what information this Gen Y chick wants to post where and what's private or not. And I already knew all the journalism profs in New York are old fossils who can't give me good employees. |
| tynansanger | Posted – 10/6/2008 7:51:25 PM | show profile | email poster mkelly, I'm not confusing them, because I believe that the old definition of "how to report" is shifting. Do we still need to write in a detached, third person AP-style article, and wait before we can check all our sources to the last detail before going ahead with the story? After newspapers took the Swift Boaters seriously in 2004 or held back on the Edwards scandal this year despite an onslaught of more immediate coverage on blogs, I think it became readily apparent that the standards for "how to report have changed," for better or (as old media types would say) for worse. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 10/6/2008 8:24:48 PM | show profile I can see a lot of arguments against j-school, but the motion that a j degree would make you look "like a privileged kid looking to pay for connections" seems really silly to me. -- was seriously considering J-School after graduation, but everyone who I spoke to said don't go. Most of the responses I got not only mentioned the lack of career doors that J-School would open, but also made the point that going to J-school may actually hurt me in the media job hunt, as publications would see me as a privileged kid looking to pay for media connections. -- |
| mkelly | Posted – 10/6/2008 8:57:16 PM | show profile You've confused 'how to report' with how to write. As I mentioned above, reporting is about how to read people, ask the right questions, and deduce what is really going on. If you can't do that, all you're doing is slinging BS whether it's in detached AP style or some hipper-than-thou blog format. I'm the editor, I'll clean up your copy into whatever format I need-- but what I need is someone who can get the facts. That's rare. As to not necessarily nailing down every fact before you go with the story... well, a friend of mine at a tabloid in our city skipped a few steps just like you suggest. When the litigation was done, it had cost his newspaper $3 million. I don't care if you're Hunter S. Thompson, no amount of stylish new journalism is worth that much. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 10/6/2008 10:39:22 PM | show profile You're bundling together a lot of didn't things here and confusing "how to report" with how the reportage is written up. The pyramid style of newswriting has been shifting for 30 years, since the advent of new journalism allowed more of the reporters voice, especially for magazines. No doubt the Internet will speed that up. At the same time, reporting and commenting (which is what most blogs do) are different animals. What you're talking about here in the main isn't about how to report. It's whether in the Internet era a story can go forward with less substantiation. But again that isn't because reporting is different, but because the reporter runs out of time to do the reporting. --mkelly, I'm not confusing them, because I believe that the old definition of "how to report" is shifting. Do we still need to write in a detached, third person AP-style article, and wait before we can check all our sources to the last detail before going ahead with the story? After newspapers took the Swift Boaters seriously in 2004 or held back on the Edwards scandal this year despite an onslaught of more immediate coverage on blogs, I think it became readily apparent that the standards for "how to report have changed," for better or (as old media types would say) for worse.-- |
| Village Gal | Posted – 10/7/2008 9:19:37 AM | show profile I did not think anyone was objecting to her blogging about her class and what she wrote was hardly personal as compared to what people write in memoirs and personal essays. The members of my writing group- mostof us are over 40- publish well-written personal pieces in newspapers and magazines all the time. We are intersted in reading and publishing well crafted work, not some crap dashed off in ten minutes. So don't give me that nonsense about the younger Generation having invented personal reveals. What is different is the venue and the quality of the writing. Most blogs I have skimmed are badly written, including those written by baby boomer colleagues. If people want to write that, be my guest but it's hardly a career path. wqualityyo |
| seamus.mediabistro | Posted – 10/7/2008 12:10:18 PM | show profile Great discussion. But enough with the "chick" talk There is some great discussion in here. But can we stick in a fork in referring to Alana Taylor as a "chick?" She's may be a student, but she deserves some respect as you all do as media professionals, regardless of age. She also writes for one of the most most read blogs on the Internet that's covers this shift in the media and tech landscape, so some professional respect would be appreciated as well. Feel free to disagree with her and your fellow posters, but do it respectfully. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 10/7/2008 1:10:15 PM | show profile I agree -- equal treatment. The chick is a chick, and all the guys are dudes. --Great discussion. But enough with the "chick" talk There is some great discussion in here. But can we stick in a fork in referring to Alana Taylor as a "chick?" She's may be a student, but she deserves some respect as you all do as media professionals, regardless of age. She also writes for one of the most most read blogs on the Internet that's covers this shift in the media and tech landscape, so some professional respect would be appreciated as well. Feel free to disagree with her and your fellow posters, but do it respectfully.-- |
| mkelly | Posted – 10/7/2008 2:01:19 PM | show profile When Alana asks me not to call her a chick, I'll consider it. I'll also tell her (and anyone else) to develop a thicker skin, since she'll be called a lot worse before her career is done. I'd suggest anyone else do the same. --The Dude |
| Village Gal | Posted – 10/7/2008 2:16:00 PM | show profile Interesting how the moderator jumps into this thread. Granted MB did start this post but I hardly think calling someone a chick ona BB is that awful. Much worse name calling takes place on other parts of this board and it is not moderated. I'm curious what made Seamus post this link in the first place. |
| Grateful Deadline | Posted – 10/7/2008 8:57:36 PM | show profile "Chick" is tiddlywinks compared with the racist tripe that's allowed to stand in the "Current Events" section of the board. That kind of garbage is the main reason I don't tell my students about Media Bistro; I can't direct them to places where it's tolerated. |
| JeanMarie | Posted – 10/8/2008 1:21:56 AM | show profile Why is it so many students expect a worthwhile education to just be delivered to them on a silver platter? Any successful college experience is a collaborative exploration of the past, present and future. What is so disturbing to me about this student's take is that she doesn't see the opportunities in her situation. She blogs because it's easy. She complains to the sky because it requires no real action. She judges without considering that the 'exchange' of information is more productive than trying to set yourself apart or above another person. (Note: This exchange does require some interpersonal skills as well as some other communication basics, and some sweat in rare situations.) I see it in the courses I assist in. Whether it's sentence structure, computer software operations, or enterprise reporting - they just want you to give them the answer. Few are interesting in learning how to learn, or becoming independent thinkers or problem-solvers. Don't expect your journalism program to do for you what you should be doing for yourself. |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 10/8/2008 1:36:25 AM | show profile I thought it was a silly bit of political correctness too, but generally I find the contributors of moderators on this board a waste of time. --Interesting how the moderator jumps into this thread. Granted MB did start this post but I hardly think calling someone a chick ona BB is that awful. Much worse name calling takes place on other parts of this board and it is not moderated. I'm cur-- |
| mkelly | Posted – 10/8/2008 8:04:15 AM | show profile >>Few are interesting in learning how to learn, or becoming independent thinkers or problem-solvers. Amen, JeanMarie. I could not agree more. |
| detour_memphis | Posted – 10/8/2008 11:55:27 AM | show profile Young Writers Welcome to the 21st century PEOPLE!!! Writing - it has evolved into this current creature. Love it or leave it. Young people have embraced these blogs, non-third person writing, and other "new journalism" stuff. Maybe the "old journalism" people need to step aside and let the young people blog and twit. Now - bring on the comments. |
