Good Night and Good Luck Review

 

                                                                Photo: Rotten Tomatoes 

The film Good Hight and Good Luck was a full that was written and directed by George Clooney and Grand Heslov. The film takes place in the late 50’s and it tells the story of  CBS reporter Edward Murrow and his producer Fred Friendly. Throughout the film they talk about the the current communist scandal with a senator who was campaigning. Edward Murrow in the film has a hard time battling with what to do with the information he discovers and the best way to handle the situation. Furthermore, it follows different employees and the way that exposing and talking about the senator has effected their job. 

                                                                 

   

                                                                    Photo: The Guardian 

The movie was very interesting because it gave a glimpse into the life of journalists at the time and they ways they worked. It also showed how at the time they have a lot stricter rules and a lot more red tape. Especially on the things that they said. I particularly enjoyed one scene when one of the main characters Edward Murrow drops a huge bomb on his show and during that time viewers were allowed to call in.   

                                                                            

                                                                            Photo: MUBI

However, after he did this there are no calls coming in so everyone is scrambling around trying to figure out whey there are no call coming in. Especially since some of them put heir jobs on the line. Until one of the employees realizes that the has something unplugged and then the calls start flooding in. I really enjoyed their movie because it showed the hard work and dedication that  journalists put into their work at that time they didn’t have all of the resources that we have today so they hade to work diligently to ensure their work and information was well vetted.

EOTO Reaction : The Satire of Political Cartoons

                                                                      

          

                                                                        Photo: Insider

Today’s presentation spoke about cartoonists and the way they work with the news. Cartooning seems like a family easy going job, however over the years with certain political and global changes cartooning has had a lot of power. In most older newspapers there would be a cartoon section, the illustrated would make drawling of something light hearted that would ultimately have a deeper meaning under the joke. However over the years it has developed into a very powerful ways to speak out about certain issues and it has also been used to perpetuate propaganda especially in war times. However the problem with these cartoons is that they were often offensive. 

                                                                       Photo: Open Culture 

The first cartoons started around 1754 by Benjamin Franklin, the cartoon was created to persuade people to join a colony. The cartoon said ‘Join or Die’ which depicted a snake that was divided up into pieces to represent the different colonies. In a way it is the first illustration of propaganda because it sparked concern in the people who read it and it caused action in them. 

                                                                Photo: Benjamin Franklin 

Though today majority of them are purely satirical and manly political and they usually make fun of certin political figures or our current state in the world. For example during Former President Donald Trump’s time in office there were many cartoons made of him because his time in office was very controversial. Especially towards the end of his presidency once the pandemic picked up. Though the cartoons can be very informative for the public to keep up with the current topics though the shouldn’t be taken seriously as a pure form of news since it is comedy at the end of the day. 

                                                                    Photo: The Denver Post 

We learned also in the presentation that the cartoonists have an association known as the AAEC or the American Association of Editorial Cartoonist. This association mainly prompts the work of the people who are featured on the website. It also acts as a way for the public to go on their website and look at the different pieces. Overall cartoonists are a very necessary job because they offer a break from the heaviness of of the news and media in general. And although hey do touch on real topics we face everyday, the creative illustrations  help ease the blow of them. 

                                                                    Photo: The Mercury News

EOTO Response: Anonymous Sources

 In the world of Journalism the main way that we get information for our work is though using different types of sources. It is best to use a direct source, which is someone who is credible with a story that can be proven and has no reason to lie. This can at times be tricky however, that is where our skills as journalists come alive. 

Today a group presented an EOTO on the history of Journalist using anonymous sources. They went over the times journalists have used it and it has gone well. For example, with the infamous Nixon Watergate scandal we learned about how the the journalist who covered that story made good use of his anonymous source. A source who at the time was only known as ‘Deep Throat’, it later came out that it was a former FBI agent who was thought to be but was never confirmed to be the anonymous source. They met in secured and they were able to communicate that way and it resulted in a helpful story that exposed Nixion’s crimes. 

                                                                Photo: Peter Osnos

However on the other end of this the group also went over a Journalist who didn’t make good use of her anonymous sources, who in fact were never real in the first place. Janet Cooke was an American journalist who published a story in the Washington Post Titled “Jimmy’s World”, it was advertised as an account of a young Black boy who was struggling with his heroin addiction. This story caused outrage because people were looking for the boy who was being so neglected by his parents that he would have the opportunity to become a heroin addict at the age of eight. 

The story was so sensational that Cooke even went on to win a Pulitzer Prize for it. However, it was later discovered that the story was completely fabricated. Janet Cooke would go in to loose her job and her credibility however, it started a larger conversation about the way journalists work and the ways and times that they are allowed to use anonymous sources. Before class today I had never heard of this case or known about this anonymous source standard that Journalist have now. Overall, I found it to be informative as well as widely fascinating. 

EOTO Reaction: Trial By Media

       

                                                                            Photo:Netflix

In the eyes of the law the way we make decisions often has a lot to do with trial. A person is accused of something and then they go before a judge and a jury and they tell their side and the evidence is supposed to speak for itself. This is theoretically how justice is supposed to work. However, what happens when the media gets a whiff of a murder trial or an impressive embezzling scheme that almost worked.

It can begin to get somewhat out of the hands of the Judge and Jury because the media has now spoken, with the huge headlines and ongoing articles. This has led to the phenomenon known as a “Trial by Media”. This phenomenon was probably seen the most in the O.J Simpson case.

                                                                            Photo: LA Times

O.J Simpson was a famous NFL Player who was accused of killing his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. Shortly after her death her ex-husband O.J Simpson’s trial started. It quickly became the case of the century it was televised which allowed the public to make their own mind about the case. This allowed the public and the media to sensationalize the case and turn it into the infamous case we know today.

                                                                    Photos: People Magizine

The phrase trial by media perfectly explains this case, a trial that was meant to only be in the courts ended up being broadcasted for the world to see. Effectively the social repercussions of the case is what trial by media ultimately means. Even though O.J Simpson was acquitted of the charges against Nicole Brown Simpson, he still ended up going to jail anyway for separate charges. However, the public had already decided that he was guilty in their own eyes. We see this happen even today when certin crimes happen in the news the people have such harsh social repercussions that follow the person even enter the crime or the story is long over. Weather the person was found guilty or innocent in the legal courts or not. 

                                                                        Photo:Medium.com

This topic Is extremely interesting and it attempts to take a deeper look at human behavior and at the way we see and judge things. It also causes us as people to take a better look at the way the media portrays cases. It also starts a bigger conversation of cancel couture and the way society condemns people socially. 

EOTO #3 : The Trouble With Paparazzi

  

                                                              Photo: An Other Magazine 

 When you think of the paparazzi you generally instantly think of antsy mobs of people following the Kardashians or shouting at people on the read carpet. Though those things do happen, who really known when the paparazzi originated or what their original purpose. It seems as though they have always been there. For starters the word Paparazzi comes from an Italian origin of the word Paparazzo. The first ever paparazzi photographer was Tazio Secchiaroli, he was a photographer in Rome in the 50’s. 

    At this time magazines wanted to get photos of celebrities living their everyday lives. Before this celebrities just walked around and lived their lives without having to be photographed in the same way that they are now. So once magazines put this out Photographers started going out an following celebrities in order to get shots of them for any Magazine who would buy them. Ever since then, the paparazzi and celebrities have had a complicated relationship. Many celebrities often complain about the presence of the paparazzi because they say that it prevents them from living their normal lives. However celebrities also tip of the paparazzi when they want to be seen or need the publicity. 

                                                                    Photo: I-stock Photo

    However though the paparazzi is a normal practice and it helps feed a lot of new for pop culture magazine’s and TV shows there have always been questions as to its legality. For example the way some paparazzi have aggressively followed celebrities and even trespassed to get the perfect shot. Because of this many celebrities have taken legal action. For instance filing harassment charges against them for the at times excessive following or the mistreatment of some celebrities children. However, being a paparazzi photographer is actually legal there are just certain regulations they have to follow. For example, they are not trespass in order to get the shot, take photos in public rest use or in secured areas, and finally at a crime scene. If these rules are violates they could possible be arrested. They also are not allowed to do anything that would require them to get any photos that would require them to put away one in danger. 

                                                                Photo: The Independent 

    This was the result of the death of Princes Diana who died after trying to evade the paparazzi. Her car flipped and she sustained injuries that would later lead to hear death in the operating room. Ever since that tragic accident in 1997 the paparazzi have had a bad reputation in the eyes of many. Some people think that that was just an unfortunate accident that shouldn’t speak for the field in its entirety. Were as others feel that it should have been the last trap of many. All of this raises a bigger question as to weather or not the paparatzi do more harm than good. Should we as the people have a right to know what celebrities do in their off time since we are what keeps them in the lie light? Or should they get to go home the same way we do at night and be just like a normal person?