Journalism, the World and the Future
Discussion of the future of journalism from GMU
I just posted on the DC SPJ website a rather long item from the US Census Bureau with all sorts great data about mothers and Mother’s Day.
Mother’s Day coming! Need some background data for a story?
Did you know:
- The average age of a woman giving birth for the first time was 25 in 2006?
- August was the month with the most births in 2006?
- Wednesday was the most common day to give birth that same year?
- There were 9.9 million single mothers with children younger than 18 in 2009?
Now you do.
Earlier I posted a report from the WWW2010 about a Korean report on how Twitter was more of a news service than just a social network. (Twitter: An news service limited to 140 characters)
Well, we it is nice to know that the scientific process backs up what some people already knew.
In Twitter: That Wild Beast, Cuban blogger and free press advocate Yoani Sanchez talks about Twitter as a news service.
It is true that we broadcast blindly and that we cannot read our readers’ replies or references, but at least we are reporting on the Island in 140 character fragments.
Always thinking in terms of conspiracies, agents and plots, [the Cuban police] haven’t noticed that the technologies have turned every citizen into his or her own mass media. It is no longer foreign correspondents who validate a given story in the eyes of the world, but rather, increasingly, it is our own forays on Twitter that are turned into informative references.
We saw in Iran and China how Twitter has become a major source for news unfettered by the national censors. Here again is validation of that.
First posted at Journalism, Journalists and the World.
A recent study in Korea showed that Twitter was more than narcissistic recordings of one’s breakfast choices. It is a news service the provides timely information about global events.
One of the researches, Haewoon Kwak, presented the paper at the WWW2010 conference in South Carolina last week.
Joad Jackson at ITWorld reported on the paper:
The newsy aspect of Twitter is reflected in the question its users are now asked when posting tweets — “What’s happening?” — as opposed to the earlier question, “What are you doing?” And many people use the service to search for up-to-the-second information about unfolding events, such as a football game or a natural disaster.
Jackson also notes that unlike Facebook or MySpace, if oyu want to follow someone, you do not heed his/her permission. Plus, Twitter allows you realtime searches of topics and the ability to keep topics organized with hash (#) tags.
If you are into complicated math, you can read the whole report here as a PDF document: What is Twitter, a Social Network or a News Media?
This survey backs up anecdotal information.
When PBS merged the various offices of the NewsHour into one place and enhanced the program’s online presence, the old and new media saw how the other worked.
When the shootings at Fort Hood took place the Old Media folks grabbed their phones and started calling sources. The New Media folks grabbed their mobile phones and started Tweeting looking for immediate and accurate information from people on the scene.
Thanks to Steve Klein at George Mason for Tweeting about this.
First posted at DC SPJ Pro site.
The Gallup folks just released a survey looking at most desired country for immigration and those who immigrate.
And the possibilities for stories using the Gallup numbers, some Census data and a little shoe leather are limitless.
Young, Less Educated Yearn to Migrate to the U.S.
Canada more attractive to older, more educated adults
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Fifteen countries attract about 500 million of the roughly 700 million adults worldwide who say they would like to relocate permanently to another country if they could. Gallup finds the U.S. is clearly the No. 1 desired destination among these potential migrants, with more than 165 million saying they would like to move there, and neighboring Canada is a distant second with 45 million.
There are some interesting numbers in the survey.
The United States is the country of choice for the youngest and less-educated groups interviewed.
So what do those numbers mean?
Here is one explanation from Gallup:
These differences may partly reflect the emphasis each country’s immigration policy places on different categories of migrants. In the U.S., Department of Homeland Security statistics show family-sponsored migrants account for the largest percentage of those who become legal permanent residents each year, followed by workers. The reverse is true in Canada, where government migration statistics show applicants with higher levels of education, job experience, and skills make up the largest portion of legal permanent residents, and those in the family category make up the second-largest portion.
While the U.S. and Canada have long histories as major immigrant-receiving countries, they also differ in how they welcome new migrants and integrate them into their societies economically, politically, socially, and culturally. Canada’s government actively assists migrants when they arrive, including providing free language-training vouchers. The United States on the other hand, according to a 2008 Independent Task Force report on immigration policy, has no national integration policy and provides little support for English-language classes.
SO, the U.S. policy of family reunification naturally would lead to more younger and less educated people showing up. Think about it, mom and/or dad are in the States and eventually get a Green Card. They then send for their children.
Younger and less educated.
But there is more. (There is always more when dealing with surveys and numbers.)
Where the immigrants come from and their choice of country to move to shows something about the immigrants as well. Take a look at age AND home region:
Canada won in the Southeast Asian respondents between ages 15-24 but the U.S. took all the others. After the age of 24, however, Canada wins hands down.
So there is a regional bias for Canada as well.
Why?
And as soon as the education level goes to completed secondary level, the U.S. falls behind:
This all has policy implications.
But for journalists, let’s look at something else.
What does your county or town look like?
What immigrant groups are there? What are their education levels? Why did they come to Fairfax or Arlington Counties? Why did they move to Maryland or the District?
For some of the answers you can go to the Census Bureau. (You just had to know I was going to promote that treaduer trove of data.) And for others you will have to <gasp!> go out and talk to people.
Let’s get you started:
Here is a table of Fairfax County.
S0501. Selected Characteristics of the Native and Foreign-Born Populations
It is data collected by the Census Bureau during the years 2006-2008. It part of the American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates project.
Once you open the table you will notice a few things.
In Fairfax County:
- 36 percent of the foreign born are white, 42 percent are Asian, 29 percent are Hispanic and 9 percent are black.
- 49 percent of the foreign born are in a college or graduate program, compared to 32 percent of the native population
- 20 percent of the foreign born have a graduate or professional degree, compared to 32 percent of the native population
- 29 percent of the foreign born have an annual income of $75,000 or more, compared to 56 percent of the native population.
Fairfax County is not a typical county. (We all know that.) How atypical is it?
Go look it up yourself.
Reporters Without Borders issued a statement over the weekend about the situation in Thailand. (Media beset by both violence and state of emergency)
The statement discussed the massive censorship taking place by the government — more than 2,500 websites shut down and newspapers intimidated — and violence against journalists on both sides. (Two journalists killed while covering the demonstrations and demonstrators tossing bottles and other debris at journalists.)
But one portion struck me as a lesson about changes in journalism:
Unaware of the risks, foreign tourists have also been “covering” the protests in the hope of being able to sell photos or video footage of the clashes.
These citizen journalists are stepping into situations that could endanger their lives in the hope of selling material to news organizations.
Even the seasoned journalists assigned to Bangkok are nervous about the situation. The RSF statement makes that clear:
Bangkok-based correspondents have little training in covering “conflict zones.”
Journalists understand that at any time we could be tossed into a dangerous situation. And I wonder how many of those currently covering the situation in Thailand ever expected to be in the middle of a series of war zones. (An explosion over the weekend killed a Japanese cameraman.)
But what we all bring to the story is the ability to provide context. That is what our profession requires of us. A picture of a demonstrator means nothing (other than showing anger, frustration, dedication) unless the reader/viewer also knows the story behind the picture.
Pictures and videos help tell the story. By themselves, these graphics cannot tell the whole story.
For more information about the situation in Thailand go to Thai situation dangerous to journalists and media freedom
