Journalism 1 portfolio

My topic is Public schools vs. Private school: Which school are you better off going too?

Questions I want answered:

• Why do people go to Private school?
• Why do so many people go to Public school?
• Which gives a better future?
• Which school has the best trained teachers for learning?
• Why is Private school so expensive?
• How expensive is Private school really?
• Why doesn’t the state help with the tuition of private schools?
• Is Private really much better than Public school?

Which school are you better off going too? This is my localized angle because here in Buffalo  we have six public elementary schools, a public middle school, and only one private school for grades Pre-school through 8th grade.

I went to a private school in the cities firsthand about two weeks ago to research. I have completed five interviews so far. Three at St. Croix Lutheran High school. Two of them have been done here, one of which went to a private school til now and the other has gone to a public school their whole life.

I so far have three very informational articles for my secondhand research. I would like to find more with more in depth information.

Interesting things that I have discovered:

• Private school is’t just for the rich.
• Not all private people are snotty and smart
• Public school is where ninety percent of parents send their kids.
• Private school can cost more than 10,000 dollars for one year of high school.
• Not every Private school is religious
• Public school teachers have a better education for teaching.

Yes i have a little bit more research left. I would like to finish finding answers for my questions above. More articles and a professional may get me there.

When I write this “big” story I am going to focus on sticking to my angle and t=getting the most out of my research into the paper in a understandable, easy to read way.

Deception:

Personally, I don’t think shows like Bait Car and What would you do? are ethical journalism. It is not right to air these shows as news; because its not news. It’s just showing what is going on in the world. These things are happening around the world, however its not newsworthy to me.  If it was newsworthy, then it would be aired on the News channel before it ended up as its own show. 

 I believe that these shows are an inappropriate use of deception, because they are acted out by people to decieve others about things that have happened around the world. Actors make the situations that are acted out, which are worse then they actually are.  They add drama to the situations to draw in a larger viewing audience.

Journalists and T.V. programs may use deception to get a better view on a story, but there has to be limits. I honestly think, that there needs to be a limit between how personal a journalist can get to the subject. If you use deception and the subject still doesnt want to tell you certain things that could be personal for whatever reason then I don’t think you should question them any further. Let them be before you ruin your chance of the entire interview.

Journalists have to hold themselves accountable to a ethical set of rules; like from the Rules of Deception. You need to acknowledge when the questions are getting personal then you may have to change the subject if your getting too deceptive. When using deception, don’t make it obvious. If your deception is going to hurt a person then don’t do it. The point of deception is to not to get violent or to harm someone or something in the process. Like I said, when your deception will cause harm or ruin the reputation of a subject then your storys’ not worth getting a hold of.

If and when using deception you must be careful because your viewers will always want the truth, not lies or gimics. Viewers don’t want to be reading three or four different written articles about someone or something, they just want the truth.

If and when you really think about deception, it will tend to bring you back to libel. The reason I mention this is, because when you use deception you could be creating information that is not the truth and it could harm a person’s reputation.

Overall, I’d say play it safe when using deception. If you use it in the wrong way, it could end with some serious trouble.

Hello! My name is Taylor Susa and I am a freshman blogger for Mr. McCallum’s Journalism 1 class. What I have learned from making my presentation above, is that both of the cases that my group and I had were very similar in their own way.

I learned that the Time vs. Firestone case was a Libel law suit. In which means that someone had crushed someone else’s identity in words for all of the public eyes to see. Time magazine did this to Mrs. Firestone after the divorce to Mr. Firestone. Every plaintiff (person that brings the case to court) must prove publication, identification, and defamation. They have to prove that the person is a public person.  The person has to of been, throwing themselves out there in the public’s eyes for everyone to see. Which in this case Mrs. Firestone wasn’t. In these days we can’t always assume that a person is in the public eye.

Proxmire vs. Hutchinson case had the same situation as the Firestone case, the defendent never became a public figure. They too had lost professional and academic standings.

In the Westmoreland vs. CBS presentation I learned that even if the plaintiff sues a major company, then they may not be telling the truth at all times.  If someone wants to file a libel lawsuit then they must prove that they were defamed. When they cannot find proof of any defamation then there is no need for a case.

While watching the Dunn and Bradstr vs. Greenmoss Builder Inc. presentation I learned that the First Amendment does not protect the speech of a non-media party. I also learned that you can get damages without proof a malice.

During the Ariel Sharon vs. Time presentation I learned that in order to win a case you must have these three things: Proof for malice, proof of defamation, and that falsehood took place.

One of the most importants things in the Gertz vs. Welch case is that journalists cannot write libel about private citizens, they can for public figures all they want but not private citizens.

Throughout the week I have learned the differences of a private citizen and a public person. I learned that certain laws have been created through some of these trials. Being a journalist is a very risky thing. I learned how to protect myself from getting sued and having to deal with lawsuits.

I think the limitations that have been placed for the media are not quite fair enough, because a lot of journalists and news paper companies, etc have still been given lawsuits.

For the six cases that we covered in class I believe that the end result is fair and that the court made the right decision. Journalists have quite a bit of freedom; they just need to be more careful and know what the laws are to protect themselves. By doing this there should not be as many lawsuits filed.

For High School media there are not many laws that protect high school journalists.  I believe that there should be more to keep us safer.

Welcome to BHM WordPress Network Sites. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!