Showing posts with label journalism education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journalism education. Show all posts
October 12, 2018
Interesting read: How skillsets of local, national journalists are diverging
This was an interesting read from Nieman Reports in the past week:
March 07, 2018
'Athens journalism institution' wins University of Georgia's new award for distinguished community journalism, named for him
The award will recognize "the best in community journalism, as represented by small- to medium-sized daily and weekly news organizations who provide exemplary service to their communities," the school said in announcing the award.
Charles Davis, dean of the college, said, “Pete McCommons is an Athens journalism institution, the man who gave the Athens Observer its verve [after co-founding it in 1974] and who created Flagpole as an important countercultural voice of progressivism in the city. His unflagging spirit, his devotion to Athens and to journalism make him the ideal namesake for this new award.”
McCommons has been publisher of Flagpole since 1994. He recently published his first book, Pub Notes, a collection of his Flagpole columns of the same name. In his latest, he thanked the college and those who endowed the award and said, "After almost 50 years making up community journalism as we go along, getting this award from the Grady College is like being certified. It is huge."
January 09, 2018
July 19, 2017
Intern and weekly editor show how to deal with, and engage with, critics
Josh Qualls was having difficulty finding a source to help him explain how the House health-insurance bill might affect seniors on Medicaid in Lincoln County, Kentucky, where he just completed a summer internship with The Interior Journal in Stanford. So he went to the Boone Newspapers weekly's Facebook page.
"The very first response echoed some of the most disheartening, gut-wrenching rhetoric we’ve seen directed toward journalists in recent months. Its author offered a scathing indictment of the news media and accused us of being liberally biased," Qualls wrote in his intern report to the Kentucky Press Association, relying on memory because the poster had deleted the post. "She talked about how much 'Obamacare' didn’t help her health-hindered family, so I saw a way to connect with her."
Qualls wrote, “We appreciate your feedback … and we’re sorry to learn about your health problems and your family’s health-care situation. Our hearts go out to you.” He said no one at the newspaper "was happy with the Affordable Care Act allowing premiums to increase at an alarming rate," but said journalists must "seek the truth and report it," as the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics says.
“The truth, based on what we know about the American Health Care Act so far, is that these proposals may have long-term effects that are even more damaging than Obamacare,” Qualls posted. “The Congressional Budget Office reported last Wednesday that while premiums would likely decrease for younger Americans, older Americans would likely see a substantial increase and lose many of their benefits.”
Then he wrote this, which KPA highlighted in its report to members: “In this newsroom, we all have different political beliefs but respect each other. What we all have in common is that we’re biased against the things that harm the community we serve, and by community we mean people like you.” Those are lines to remember.
"The author quickly wrote back," Qualls reported to KPA. "She said that she never really thought about it that way and would consider what we wrote, that she appreciated our effort to connect with her and to explain what we were trying to accomplish." He and Editor Abigail Whitehouse, who had approved his message, "were ecstatic," yelling "We got through to someone!"
Though the reader soon deleted her post and the comments, Qualls said the episode showed the value of engaging with readers through social media: "People may think now that they have carte blanche to denigrate journalists, but Abigail taught me that we don’t have to cower in fear of what they might say or do — we must respectfully stand our ground. It simply comes down to this: People hate what they don’t understand, and some people unfortunately don’t understand journalists."
Qualls is a May graduate of the University of Kentucky School of Journalism and Media.
"The very first response echoed some of the most disheartening, gut-wrenching rhetoric we’ve seen directed toward journalists in recent months. Its author offered a scathing indictment of the news media and accused us of being liberally biased," Qualls wrote in his intern report to the Kentucky Press Association, relying on memory because the poster had deleted the post. "She talked about how much 'Obamacare' didn’t help her health-hindered family, so I saw a way to connect with her."
 |
| Josh Qualls |
“The truth, based on what we know about the American Health Care Act so far, is that these proposals may have long-term effects that are even more damaging than Obamacare,” Qualls posted. “The Congressional Budget Office reported last Wednesday that while premiums would likely decrease for younger Americans, older Americans would likely see a substantial increase and lose many of their benefits.”
Then he wrote this, which KPA highlighted in its report to members: “In this newsroom, we all have different political beliefs but respect each other. What we all have in common is that we’re biased against the things that harm the community we serve, and by community we mean people like you.” Those are lines to remember.
"The author quickly wrote back," Qualls reported to KPA. "She said that she never really thought about it that way and would consider what we wrote, that she appreciated our effort to connect with her and to explain what we were trying to accomplish." He and Editor Abigail Whitehouse, who had approved his message, "were ecstatic," yelling "We got through to someone!"
Though the reader soon deleted her post and the comments, Qualls said the episode showed the value of engaging with readers through social media: "People may think now that they have carte blanche to denigrate journalists, but Abigail taught me that we don’t have to cower in fear of what they might say or do — we must respectfully stand our ground. It simply comes down to this: People hate what they don’t understand, and some people unfortunately don’t understand journalists."
Qualls is a May graduate of the University of Kentucky School of Journalism and Media.
July 19, 2016
Teach the value of community journalism at AEJMC preconference session
We still have spots available for our pre-conference session "‘Hyping’ hyperlocal: Teaching the value of community journalism in the classroom and the startup." I've listed this session as one of our interest group's biggest accomplishments because I think it offers the perfect opportunity and the necessary time to really explore the issue that makes our group tick: the impact of community on journalism and vice versa and how to apply it in the ever-changing new media world.
Speakers include members and past presidents of the interest group, such as Bill Reader, Ohio University; Al Cross, University of Kentucky; Barbara Selvin, Stony Brook; and John Hatcher, University of Minnesota Duluth. Toni Albertson, Mt. San Antonio College, will also share how she has used Medium.com to empower her college's student newspaper, and Timothy Waltner, retired newspaper publisher, and ISWNE member, will share how the industry is incorporating community in all they do.
Please share this post with anyone you think is interested. The session will take place Wednesday, Aug. 3 from 1 to 5 p.m. It costs $10, but that's just to cover AV needs and a short drink break for everyone at 3 p.m.
Thanks to Toni Albertson and Rich Johnson, COMJ's teaching standards chair for setting this up. If you have any questions, drop them a line at TAlbertson@mtsac.edu or RichJohnson@creighton.edu. Let's make sure we have a full house for this important session.
September 13, 2015
DEADLINE EXTENDED to Oct. 12 for abstracts of papers responding to initiative on journalism, citizenship and democracy
Abstracts are due Oct. 12
The call says the reviewers, led by COMJIG member Jack Rosenberry, will be "particularly interested in papers that develop and test a new curriculum, or experiment with a practice innovation in the newsroom or in other media."
The call is a result of an initiative by the Kettering Foundation that convened a select group of journalism educators to discuss how service to democracy can play a larger role in journalism education.
As Jack said in a Sept. 9 message to COMJIG members, the call is "focused on journalism that helps communities to recognize their shared problems and act on them. Our goal is to develop innovative ideas for meaningful changes in journalism education."
Interested scholars are invited to submit, by Sept. 19, abstracts of no more than 1,500 words that clearly state: (1) The objective of the work and its relevance to the topic of how journalism can address problems of democracy by helping foster the process of citizens working together to solve shared public problems; (2) The methods that will be used to examine the question or topic; (3) What the project is expected to discover; and (4) What will be the expected significance of the work.
Abstracts will undergo peer review and up to 20 proposals will be selected for
researchers to turn into full papers by April 2016. Top papers as selected by
further peer review will be presented at the 2016 AEJMC conference in
Minneapolis and also appear in Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly. The
very top papers will earn cash awards.
Full details of the research call, including the process for
submitting the abstracts, can be found at http://www.aejmc.org/home/2015/07/citizenship-democracy/.
June 12, 2014
Saving Community Journalism at UNC
A good look at the University of North Carolina's program to help community news orgs move into the digital age:
http://endeavors.unc.edu/saving_community_journalism
http://endeavors.unc.edu/saving_community_journalism
September 11, 2012
Call for panelists
A colleague and I have an idea for a 2013 panel on the mentoring of adjunct professors.
As my colleague wrote: “Enrollments at communication departments are growing, and so are the ranks of their adjunct professors. How do departments mentor those adjuncts? My department (accredited by ACEJMC, 800+ undergrads and 30 grad students, with 14 full-time faculty and 37 adjuncts) has launched a new program to work with our adjuncts. It includes an annual half-day workshop in early September, a faculty handbook, an adjunct mentor (our "uber adjunct," a newspaper reporter who has taught for us for 20+ years), peer evaluations by full-time faculty, and a website on ANGEL featuring "best practices" course syllabi.
“I'm guessing a lot of other com departments are dealing with this situation (a lot of adjunct professors, trying to ensure consistency of instruction in multiple sections of the same course).”
Anyone interested in being on such a panel? Then e-mail me (marrenjj@buffalostate.edu) or Deb Silverman (silverda@buffalostate.edu)
Thanks,
Joe
Joe Marren
chair and associate professor
Communication Department
Buffalo State College
As my colleague wrote: “Enrollments at communication departments are growing, and so are the ranks of their adjunct professors. How do departments mentor those adjuncts? My department (accredited by ACEJMC, 800+ undergrads and 30 grad students, with 14 full-time faculty and 37 adjuncts) has launched a new program to work with our adjuncts. It includes an annual half-day workshop in early September, a faculty handbook, an adjunct mentor (our "uber adjunct," a newspaper reporter who has taught for us for 20+ years), peer evaluations by full-time faculty, and a website on ANGEL featuring "best practices" course syllabi.
“I'm guessing a lot of other com departments are dealing with this situation (a lot of adjunct professors, trying to ensure consistency of instruction in multiple sections of the same course).”
Anyone interested in being on such a panel? Then e-mail me (marrenjj@buffalostate.edu) or Deb Silverman (silverda@buffalostate.edu)
Thanks,
Joe
Joe Marren
chair and associate professor
Communication Department
Buffalo State College
February 18, 2012
Editor-turned-academic falls in love with community journalism after six weeks at small newspaper
 |
| St. John, Wash., population 523 |
"It affirmed my belief in the value of community newspapers that focus singularly on their community — the good news and the bad — and that have a bond with the readers served," McKerral writes. "The Community Current is among many of those, but its signatures paint a picture of common characteristics that make it easier to understand why these papers survive and even thrive while the death knell for 'print' rings out."
McKerral's six-week sojourn, funded by his employers at Western Kentucky University, prompted him to write a 4,444-word article about community journalism that is part love poem, part hard-nosed analysis and altogether interesting for those of us who appreciate and support rural and community journalism. Read it here.
January 12, 2012
Community Journalism Syllabus Exchange
We have started the community journalism syllabus exchange at our Yahoo
group, with the first contribution by Bill Reader of Ohio University.
His syllabus covers a course specifically on community journalism.
You will find it in the "File" area of the Yahoo group .
Please contribute your syllabi. As a member of the Yahoo group, you can post them yourself and we'll see that you've done that. (To do so, you needed to create a Yahoo log on when we sent you the invitation. Some of you are getting this message because we enrolled you but you never responded to that initial message asking you to create a log on.)
If you can't post them, send them to teaching chair Andrea Frantz frantza@rmu.edu or COMJIG head Joe Marren marrenjj@buffalostate.edu for posting.
You will find it in the "File" area of the Yahoo group .
Please contribute your syllabi. As a member of the Yahoo group, you can post them yourself and we'll see that you've done that. (To do so, you needed to create a Yahoo log on when we sent you the invitation. Some of you are getting this message because we enrolled you but you never responded to that initial message asking you to create a log on.)
If you can't post them, send them to teaching chair Andrea Frantz frantza@rmu.edu or COMJIG head Joe Marren marrenjj@buffalostate.edu for posting.
December 05, 2011
COMJIG research sessions
We're trying something new this year with our research sessions at the AEJMC conference in Chicago. Along with ComTECH, we're participating in a high-denisty research session from 5 to 6:30 p.m. on Friday, Aug. 10.
Because we want to increase our visibility and try to bring in more research papers, we can have up to 10 research presentations at the Chicago conference. of teh 10, five can be presented at the high-density session and we can have up to five posters at the Scholar-to-Scholar session (also on Friday afternoon, from 1:30 to 3). Please see teh sked in a previous posting.
Now it's up to us to spread the word to kith and kin that COMJIG can be THE place to get their research noticed.
The HD guidelines are directly below from AEJMC:
Rationale:
The high-density format may be thought of as a cross between a traditional paper presentation panel and a scholar-to-scholar session. The hybrid allows more individuals to be placed on the panel (thus the name “high-density”). The key is that the individual presentations must be SHORT to allow for individual discussion with members of the audience. To insure this, your chair and discussant will be strictly enforcing the timelines discussed below. This format allows the audience members to hear the detail on those research projects that interest them the most.
Format:
Presenters will be given 4 minutes to provide an overview or summary of their paper. This time limit will be strictly enforced. You will be stopped if you exceed the time limit. No questions are taken between presentations. Since you have a short time for presentation, you are encouraged to limit audio-visual and lengthy discussions. Think of this as an executive summary or an extended abstract.
The discussant for the panel will not comment on the individual papers. The discussant’s function is to facilitate discussions between the presenters and the audience members. To achieve this goal, presenters are asked to spread out in the room so that individuals who would like to speak to them may do so. Audience members will then be able to spend some time hearing more about or asking questions about those research presentations that most interest them. To help the audience members find the proper presenter, a sign will be made with your paper title and authors. These will be taped to the walls around the room (or at tables, if available). After all the presentations are over, you must go to the area with your sign.
Presenters should prepare handouts containing outlines, key points, executive summaries, etc. for their study to distribute to the audience members. This one-page handout will help the members of the audience to comprehend your brief presentations and to select those papers they would like to hear more about. Since there will be many presenters and only one LCD projector, do not prepare materials for the discussion with individuals. It is suggested that you have limited projected material for your 4-minute presentation.
If the guidelines outlined here are followed correctly, there will be nearly 30 minutes for individual discussion. This will allow audience members to get more information on several papers.
Because we want to increase our visibility and try to bring in more research papers, we can have up to 10 research presentations at the Chicago conference. of teh 10, five can be presented at the high-density session and we can have up to five posters at the Scholar-to-Scholar session (also on Friday afternoon, from 1:30 to 3). Please see teh sked in a previous posting.
Now it's up to us to spread the word to kith and kin that COMJIG can be THE place to get their research noticed.
The HD guidelines are directly below from AEJMC:
Rationale:
The high-density format may be thought of as a cross between a traditional paper presentation panel and a scholar-to-scholar session. The hybrid allows more individuals to be placed on the panel (thus the name “high-density”). The key is that the individual presentations must be SHORT to allow for individual discussion with members of the audience. To insure this, your chair and discussant will be strictly enforcing the timelines discussed below. This format allows the audience members to hear the detail on those research projects that interest them the most.
Format:
Presenters will be given 4 minutes to provide an overview or summary of their paper. This time limit will be strictly enforced. You will be stopped if you exceed the time limit. No questions are taken between presentations. Since you have a short time for presentation, you are encouraged to limit audio-visual and lengthy discussions. Think of this as an executive summary or an extended abstract.
The discussant for the panel will not comment on the individual papers. The discussant’s function is to facilitate discussions between the presenters and the audience members. To achieve this goal, presenters are asked to spread out in the room so that individuals who would like to speak to them may do so. Audience members will then be able to spend some time hearing more about or asking questions about those research presentations that most interest them. To help the audience members find the proper presenter, a sign will be made with your paper title and authors. These will be taped to the walls around the room (or at tables, if available). After all the presentations are over, you must go to the area with your sign.
Presenters should prepare handouts containing outlines, key points, executive summaries, etc. for their study to distribute to the audience members. This one-page handout will help the members of the audience to comprehend your brief presentations and to select those papers they would like to hear more about. Since there will be many presenters and only one LCD projector, do not prepare materials for the discussion with individuals. It is suggested that you have limited projected material for your 4-minute presentation.
If the guidelines outlined here are followed correctly, there will be nearly 30 minutes for individual discussion. This will allow audience members to get more information on several papers.
December 03, 2011
Sked for Chi-town
John Hatcher and I spent the weekend in Louisville putting some of the finishing touches on COMJIG's Chicago sked (yeah, I know, tough gig but somebody had to do it, right?) We think that we have an interesting lineup of scholarly panels so make sure to pack your thinkin' cap for next August.
Just a reminder that this will be the 100th aniversary for AEJMC back in its founding city so things are a bit different this time around. We're on a Thursday to Sunday sked instead of the traditional Wednesday-Saturday rotation. But anyone in the Windy City on Wednesday, Aug. 8, won't be disappointed or left looking for something to do (are there things to do in that toddling town?) that day because COMJIG is part of a group presenting a pre-conference session from 1 to 5 p.m. titled "Legal Issues for J-Schools as News Producers: Challenges & Opportunities."
The conference formally opens on Thursday, Aug. 9, and we have two afternoon panels:
1.) A PF&R panel with our buds from CCJIG at 3:15 titled "African Media, the Arab Spring & Democratization: The 'un-seen' and 'un-mentioned' Social Side of the News Revolution."
2.) That's immediately followed with another PF&R session at 5 (so walk quickly between the rooms) with a co-sponsored session with the good folks from GLBT on "The Tragedy of Today's GLBT Journalism."
Friday, Aug. 10, is a busy day. Unfortunately, however, the sked gods hiccuped when we were going about our biz because there is a dark cloud coverng our silver lining. We have four sessions but two of them conflict. Blame it on the Bossa Nova, blame it on the sheer madness of the chip auction (any excuse in a storm is a good excuse I always say), but we'll just have to endure. First, the good news:
1.) Our scholar-to-scholar session is from 1:30 to 3 p.m.
2.) We're cosponsoring a 3:15 p.m. research session with our ol' reliables from CCJIG on "Mobile Me, Mobile We: Building and Bridging Communities With Media."
3. & 4.) Here's where things get sticky and we'll have to make the best of it. We have a conflict from 5 to 6:30 p.m. We're co-sponosring a PF&R session with SPIG on "Social Media & the Ethnic Press in Chicago" AND involved in a high-density research session with CTECH at the same time. And there's another problem. We'll really have to help the research chair find, cultivate and nurture some quality research papers. So start spreading the news. (Yeah, I know, I know, it's Chicago and I'm quoting "New York, New York," but Frankie sang about both towns so I think I have a loophole here.
Although New York (and maybe Chicago) are cities that never sleep, maybe you should get some sleep because Saturday, Aug. 11, will be a busy day.
1.) It can start as late as 12:15 with the traditional J-Lab lunch with friends from the Council of affiliates and CCJIG, but then it gets busy as the afternoon and evening wear on.
2.) At 3:30 p.m. we're working with Media Management on a merger of essentially two panels: "Starting Startups in the Business of Journalism" and "Changing the News: Exploring a Connective Journalism."
3.) Our biz meeting is at 7 p.m. on-site and our executive meeting will follow somewhere on- or off-site.
Our formal presentations end Saturday, but remember that the conference continues through Sunday, Aug. 12.
On a personal note, I've told anyone who will listen, friends and foes alike, that last year in Albuquerque I plunked two chips into teh container in teh middle of the room. This year, two prople tied my mark, though they didn't break it. I swear the container was much, much, much wider this year. When the first person swished in his two chips a woman sitting near me leaned over and asked, "Didn't you get two chips in last year?" Ahhhh, fame endures though the good that men do is oft interred with their bones but they remember the chips you sink.
See you in August!
Just a reminder that this will be the 100th aniversary for AEJMC back in its founding city so things are a bit different this time around. We're on a Thursday to Sunday sked instead of the traditional Wednesday-Saturday rotation. But anyone in the Windy City on Wednesday, Aug. 8, won't be disappointed or left looking for something to do (are there things to do in that toddling town?) that day because COMJIG is part of a group presenting a pre-conference session from 1 to 5 p.m. titled "Legal Issues for J-Schools as News Producers: Challenges & Opportunities."
The conference formally opens on Thursday, Aug. 9, and we have two afternoon panels:
1.) A PF&R panel with our buds from CCJIG at 3:15 titled "African Media, the Arab Spring & Democratization: The 'un-seen' and 'un-mentioned' Social Side of the News Revolution."
2.) That's immediately followed with another PF&R session at 5 (so walk quickly between the rooms) with a co-sponsored session with the good folks from GLBT on "The Tragedy of Today's GLBT Journalism."
Friday, Aug. 10, is a busy day. Unfortunately, however, the sked gods hiccuped when we were going about our biz because there is a dark cloud coverng our silver lining. We have four sessions but two of them conflict. Blame it on the Bossa Nova, blame it on the sheer madness of the chip auction (any excuse in a storm is a good excuse I always say), but we'll just have to endure. First, the good news:
1.) Our scholar-to-scholar session is from 1:30 to 3 p.m.
2.) We're cosponsoring a 3:15 p.m. research session with our ol' reliables from CCJIG on "Mobile Me, Mobile We: Building and Bridging Communities With Media."
3. & 4.) Here's where things get sticky and we'll have to make the best of it. We have a conflict from 5 to 6:30 p.m. We're co-sponosring a PF&R session with SPIG on "Social Media & the Ethnic Press in Chicago" AND involved in a high-density research session with CTECH at the same time. And there's another problem. We'll really have to help the research chair find, cultivate and nurture some quality research papers. So start spreading the news. (Yeah, I know, I know, it's Chicago and I'm quoting "New York, New York," but Frankie sang about both towns so I think I have a loophole here.
Although New York (and maybe Chicago) are cities that never sleep, maybe you should get some sleep because Saturday, Aug. 11, will be a busy day.
1.) It can start as late as 12:15 with the traditional J-Lab lunch with friends from the Council of affiliates and CCJIG, but then it gets busy as the afternoon and evening wear on.
2.) At 3:30 p.m. we're working with Media Management on a merger of essentially two panels: "Starting Startups in the Business of Journalism" and "Changing the News: Exploring a Connective Journalism."
3.) Our biz meeting is at 7 p.m. on-site and our executive meeting will follow somewhere on- or off-site.
Our formal presentations end Saturday, but remember that the conference continues through Sunday, Aug. 12.
On a personal note, I've told anyone who will listen, friends and foes alike, that last year in Albuquerque I plunked two chips into teh container in teh middle of the room. This year, two prople tied my mark, though they didn't break it. I swear the container was much, much, much wider this year. When the first person swished in his two chips a woman sitting near me leaned over and asked, "Didn't you get two chips in last year?" Ahhhh, fame endures though the good that men do is oft interred with their bones but they remember the chips you sink.
See you in August!
November 14, 2011
Les Anderson dies
A friend to many of us, Wichita State journalism professor Les Anderson has died.
It's truly a loss in journalism education. I was proud to call Les a friend. Last time he and I had seen each other for any amount of time was a few years ago at the Chicago AEJMC convention during a Tribune tour.
Les was a COMJIG member for a number of years.
Here is the Friends of Les Facebook page for more.
It's truly a loss in journalism education. I was proud to call Les a friend. Last time he and I had seen each other for any amount of time was a few years ago at the Chicago AEJMC convention during a Tribune tour.
Les was a COMJIG member for a number of years.
Here is the Friends of Les Facebook page for more.
September 29, 2011
Some thoughts about COMJIG from AEJMC
I post this to solicit comments from members about COMJIG. We recently went through an assessment process and then the top officers met with an AEJMC team that interpreted our self-assessment and they, in turn, made some suggestions. But it's the very last line that may cause some concern.
I've asked other COMJIG officers for their views and all agree that we need to do more on diversity, but then we seem to differ. Officers say the report can be viewed as either a wake-up call to do more and do it better, to keep doing what we're doing and do more reaching out, or to provide AEJMC with a remedial education on what COMJIG is all about. Please read over the following report and comment on what you think it means for COMJIG, as well as any thoughts on what we can do more of, &/or how we can do things better.
Thanks,
Joe
AEJMC Assessment of the Community Journalism Interest Group (2006-2011)
2010-11 Assessment Committee members: Tony DeMars, Council of Divisions; Marianne Barrett, Standing Committee on Teaching; Ann Hollifield, Standing Committee on Research; and Randall Beam, Standing Committee on Professional Freedom and Responsibility.
I. Overview: The Community Journalism Interest Group (COMJIG) was formed in 2004 and in its early years was quite strong. Its status was renewed in 2007 and that year, the group created a 24-page teaching booklet, “Community as a Teaching Resource” and collaborated with other groups and divisions on panels. In 2008 the group had five PF&R sessions including a mini-plenary. Currently though, the group faces some challenges. Perhaps the most significant in terms of its long-term prospects is the confusion over its mission and its ability to differentiate itself from the Civic and Citizen Journalism Interest Group.
Over the past five years, COMJIG has co-sponsored a number of activities with Civic and Citizen Journalism including the annual J-Lab luncheon. The two groups have discussed merging, but have decided to remain separate. When asked by the assessment team what its mission is, the group’s officers were not clear. They seemed to be defining community very broadly—ethnic, religious, geographical and other communities. The team suggested the group narrow its focus, and concentrate on becoming specialists in what it means to be a community. COMJIG, like many other AEJMC divisions and interest groups, also needs to devote attention to improving its diversity. In 2010-2011 there was no ethnic diversity among the group’s officers, panelists, moderators or discussants. Further, there is only one woman officer. Women, have, however, served as paper judges (3), panelists (3) and moderators (1).
II. Research: COMJIG has consistently struggled with research paper submissions. It received 12 in 2010, but only 8 in 2011. The difficulty in attracting submissions may in part be due to the confusion over what the group is and how it differs from Civic and Citizen Journalism. The assessment team offered the group several suggestions for bolstering the number of submissions, many of which are linked to focusing on what it means to be a community. The team also suggested the group consider participating in the mid-winter conference as a way of raising its research profile, particularly among graduate students.
III. Teaching: Over the last five years, COMJIG has largely focused on Teaching and PF&R, alternately between the two one year to the next. It has occasionally devoted some of limited programming slots to research. Most notably, in 2006-2007, COMJIG participated in a mini-plenary in which its contribution was “Community as a Resource.” As noted in the overview, the group compiled a 24-page booklet that provided teaching tips. In 2010 COMJIG co-sponsored three panels on teaching. The group has as one of its goals a syllabus sharing clearinghouse. Outside of the convention, the group produces a blog and each officer is responsible for posting to the blog at least once a month.
IV. Professional Freedom and Responsibility: As noted above, because of its limited number of programming slots, COMJIG focuses on PF&R and Teaching in alternating years. In 2011, it concentrated on PF&R with a particular emphasis on public service. Among its activities was co-sponsorship of the J-Lab luncheon, something it has done for the last several years, and was sole sponsor of a panel on community newspapers’ efforts to move content online. The group also launched a survey of state newspaper and broadcast associations and ethnic community news organizations to get input on how COMJIG and the academy could better serve the industry. Although the group is to be commended for its efforts in this regard, the assessment team wondered about the efficacy of the survey especially given the group’s limited resources. In its 2010 report, COMJIG noted its “orientation as a bridge between the academic and professional worlds means much of what we do has PF&R aspects. . .” That orientation is clearly reflected in the group’s activities.
V. General Comments and Suggestions:
The Community Journalism Interest Group seems to be at a crossroads. It continues to struggle with attracting paper submissions, has seen turnover in its membership, although its membership seems to have stabilized somewhat in 2011, and is having difficulty clearly defining its mission and differentiating itself from the Civic and Citizen Journalism Interest Group. The group recognizes the need to recruit new members who can help revitalize the group. The assessment team suggested narrowing what the group is trying to do and focusing on becoming specialists in what it means to be a community. The group should also make an effort to reach out to women and people of color. The team suggested finding a place in the group’s officer ranks for everyone who volunteers to review papers or perform other tasks during the year. To date, except for its blog, the group does not participate in any out -of-convention activities. The team suggested the group consider participating in mid-winter as a way of raising its research profile and attracting paper submissions, especially from graduate students. Given the group’s challenges, particularly with respect to its mission, AEJMC should closely examine whether the group’s status should be renewed.
I've asked other COMJIG officers for their views and all agree that we need to do more on diversity, but then we seem to differ. Officers say the report can be viewed as either a wake-up call to do more and do it better, to keep doing what we're doing and do more reaching out, or to provide AEJMC with a remedial education on what COMJIG is all about. Please read over the following report and comment on what you think it means for COMJIG, as well as any thoughts on what we can do more of, &/or how we can do things better.
Thanks,
Joe
AEJMC Assessment of the Community Journalism Interest Group (2006-2011)
2010-11 Assessment Committee members: Tony DeMars, Council of Divisions; Marianne Barrett, Standing Committee on Teaching; Ann Hollifield, Standing Committee on Research; and Randall Beam, Standing Committee on Professional Freedom and Responsibility.
I. Overview: The Community Journalism Interest Group (COMJIG) was formed in 2004 and in its early years was quite strong. Its status was renewed in 2007 and that year, the group created a 24-page teaching booklet, “Community as a Teaching Resource” and collaborated with other groups and divisions on panels. In 2008 the group had five PF&R sessions including a mini-plenary. Currently though, the group faces some challenges. Perhaps the most significant in terms of its long-term prospects is the confusion over its mission and its ability to differentiate itself from the Civic and Citizen Journalism Interest Group.
Over the past five years, COMJIG has co-sponsored a number of activities with Civic and Citizen Journalism including the annual J-Lab luncheon. The two groups have discussed merging, but have decided to remain separate. When asked by the assessment team what its mission is, the group’s officers were not clear. They seemed to be defining community very broadly—ethnic, religious, geographical and other communities. The team suggested the group narrow its focus, and concentrate on becoming specialists in what it means to be a community. COMJIG, like many other AEJMC divisions and interest groups, also needs to devote attention to improving its diversity. In 2010-2011 there was no ethnic diversity among the group’s officers, panelists, moderators or discussants. Further, there is only one woman officer. Women, have, however, served as paper judges (3), panelists (3) and moderators (1).
II. Research: COMJIG has consistently struggled with research paper submissions. It received 12 in 2010, but only 8 in 2011. The difficulty in attracting submissions may in part be due to the confusion over what the group is and how it differs from Civic and Citizen Journalism. The assessment team offered the group several suggestions for bolstering the number of submissions, many of which are linked to focusing on what it means to be a community. The team also suggested the group consider participating in the mid-winter conference as a way of raising its research profile, particularly among graduate students.
III. Teaching: Over the last five years, COMJIG has largely focused on Teaching and PF&R, alternately between the two one year to the next. It has occasionally devoted some of limited programming slots to research. Most notably, in 2006-2007, COMJIG participated in a mini-plenary in which its contribution was “Community as a Resource.” As noted in the overview, the group compiled a 24-page booklet that provided teaching tips. In 2010 COMJIG co-sponsored three panels on teaching. The group has as one of its goals a syllabus sharing clearinghouse. Outside of the convention, the group produces a blog and each officer is responsible for posting to the blog at least once a month.
IV. Professional Freedom and Responsibility: As noted above, because of its limited number of programming slots, COMJIG focuses on PF&R and Teaching in alternating years. In 2011, it concentrated on PF&R with a particular emphasis on public service. Among its activities was co-sponsorship of the J-Lab luncheon, something it has done for the last several years, and was sole sponsor of a panel on community newspapers’ efforts to move content online. The group also launched a survey of state newspaper and broadcast associations and ethnic community news organizations to get input on how COMJIG and the academy could better serve the industry. Although the group is to be commended for its efforts in this regard, the assessment team wondered about the efficacy of the survey especially given the group’s limited resources. In its 2010 report, COMJIG noted its “orientation as a bridge between the academic and professional worlds means much of what we do has PF&R aspects. . .” That orientation is clearly reflected in the group’s activities.
V. General Comments and Suggestions:
The Community Journalism Interest Group seems to be at a crossroads. It continues to struggle with attracting paper submissions, has seen turnover in its membership, although its membership seems to have stabilized somewhat in 2011, and is having difficulty clearly defining its mission and differentiating itself from the Civic and Citizen Journalism Interest Group. The group recognizes the need to recruit new members who can help revitalize the group. The assessment team suggested narrowing what the group is trying to do and focusing on becoming specialists in what it means to be a community. The group should also make an effort to reach out to women and people of color. The team suggested finding a place in the group’s officer ranks for everyone who volunteers to review papers or perform other tasks during the year. To date, except for its blog, the group does not participate in any out -of-convention activities. The team suggested the group consider participating in mid-winter as a way of raising its research profile and attracting paper submissions, especially from graduate students. Given the group’s challenges, particularly with respect to its mission, AEJMC should closely examine whether the group’s status should be renewed.
September 22, 2011
What's the word?
Community journalists may be wondering what the Project for Excellence in Journalism will say when PEJ on Monday unveils what it terms "groundbreaking research that paints a new, more nuanced portrait than captured before of how people learn about their community." That quote comes from PEJ Director Tom Rosenstiel. He says the research is groundbreaking because of a paradigm shift in methodology of data collection. Instead of the traditional method of simply asking people where they got their news about their community, the researchers took a path less traveled. It wasn't exactly a "Eureka!" moment, but the new approach instead asked people to say where they got their info in 16 different areas, from the all-important weather report (according to Paul Simon, we get all the news we need on the weather report) to where is a good place to eat (that's right, restaurant reviews).
The research of the sublime to the mundane was done with help from Pew's Internet and American Life Project and the Knight Foundation.
"The results paint an entirely different picture of local news than we have seen before, one that pinpoints the role of the newspapers more completely versus television, the internet and even volunteer newsletters and word of mouth," Rosenstiel said. "We can see a whole ecosystem of local news and information. This should help different media understand and communicate their role."
The report can be found here on Monday.
The research of the sublime to the mundane was done with help from Pew's Internet and American Life Project and the Knight Foundation.
"The results paint an entirely different picture of local news than we have seen before, one that pinpoints the role of the newspapers more completely versus television, the internet and even volunteer newsletters and word of mouth," Rosenstiel said. "We can see a whole ecosystem of local news and information. This should help different media understand and communicate their role."
The report can be found here on Monday.
September 08, 2011
"Waiter, there's a lede in my soup"
Sometimes we get so caught up in our jargon that we forget that one person's escargot is another's plate of snails.
But what the link below represents is a chance for community journalists to connect with the people we talk to and write for. Sure, we define community journalism as hyperlocal journalism, but the idea of having a "bricks-and-morter" so-called news cafe with an online one is intriguing. It also gets us out in the street.
Anyone out there doing this? (That is, having a presence away from the newsroom in the community.) Is it a worthwhile idea, or something that the Daily Monopolies down the block need to think about more than community news organizations?
Have experiences to share? Let us know, please. Let's talk.
August 29, 2011
Nominating Committee slot filled
According to our bylaws, the head of COMJIG appoints a member of the two-person Nominating Committee, whose job is it to offer a slate of candidates for IG office.
Earlier this month in St. Louis we elected Hans Meyer of Ohio to chair the committee. Former COMJIG head Andris Straumanis, at University of Wisconsin at River Falls, has agreed to also serve with Hans on the committee. (I backed into the lede there; thank God I'm not a student anymore.)
Thanks to both.
The bulk of their work will be done as we approach the 2012 national conference next August in Chicago. Most of our officers agree to continue to serve, but please give careful consideration if either Hans or Andris approaches you.
Thanks.
Earlier this month in St. Louis we elected Hans Meyer of Ohio to chair the committee. Former COMJIG head Andris Straumanis, at University of Wisconsin at River Falls, has agreed to also serve with Hans on the committee. (I backed into the lede there; thank God I'm not a student anymore.)
Thanks to both.
The bulk of their work will be done as we approach the 2012 national conference next August in Chicago. Most of our officers agree to continue to serve, but please give careful consideration if either Hans or Andris approaches you.
Thanks.
August 28, 2011
Some sad news
It is with sadness that I pass on the following information: Von Whitmore died Aug. 25 from ovarian cancer.
Von had served as the chair of the Council of Divisions since the Denver Conference last summer, and had served as vice chair of the Council for the three years before that.
She was last at the mid-Winter meeting in Albuquerque. I didn't know her well, but she was always a genuinely nice person to me.
Von had served as the chair of the Council of Divisions since the Denver Conference last summer, and had served as vice chair of the Council for the three years before that.
She was last at the mid-Winter meeting in Albuquerque. I didn't know her well, but she was always a genuinely nice person to me.
August 19, 2011
Training redux?
As more and more community news orgaizations -- legacy media and new media (which I now understand is a cliched term) -- turn to contributions from so-called "citizen journalists," the temptation is to wonder what are readers/viewers/listeners/scrollers/clickers getting for their buck?
In other words, are they getting the real story, or just a rehashed press release? If you're an editor or publisher you may wonder how can to train these people. Follow the link to see i fthis may be up your alley. Thoughts?
http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/08/bleacher-report-ups-its-game-by-taking-contributors-to-school/
In other words, are they getting the real story, or just a rehashed press release? If you're an editor or publisher you may wonder how can to train these people. Follow the link to see i fthis may be up your alley. Thoughts?
http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/08/bleacher-report-ups-its-game-by-taking-contributors-to-school/
August 15, 2011
Welcome back
As we scurry about getting ready for a new academic year, and as we recover from traveling home from St. Louis (I don't know about anyone else but storms delayed my connecting flight home by several lonnnnnnnnnng hours), the temptation is to put off COMJIG matters until we've relaxed and are ready. But, really, why not now? So, with that in mind, let me propose a few things here and now:
1.) In my remarks when I was voted in as COMJIG head last week, I was remiss in not thanking Andris for the wonderful job he did as head of the interest group last year. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. It was great working with him this past year and I am also looking forward to working with our new officers this upcoming year. A special thanks, also, to Doug Fisher who maintains all things webby.
2.) At our meeting last week we talked about raising our profile. So when I get back from several meetings this afternoon I plan on e-mailing our good friends at TCU and asking them to mention us in their new online journal. I'm also going to ask them if they would be willing to co-sponsor a postcard mailing to get our name out there and try to increase submissions for panels and papers.
3.) And that brings me to this point: We really should be thinking about doing more at the mid-year meeting in Oklahoma and at the Southeast Colloquium (in Richmond next spring). Any ideas? In the past we have talked about shared panels and such. I think this is an opportunity to attract those eager grad students who can swell our ranks and get us thinking in new directions.
4.) We really should be doing more with diversity. I spoke with Heidi Flowers, the head of the PR/advertising division, because they are also looking to do a panel on a diversity issue. So this might be a way to pool talents and save a chip at December's chip auction/planning session. Any thoughts?
5.) I also spoke with Kirsten with CCJIG and we're both confused about our IG members' wishes for next year. Our impression was that since we share some members that we want to at least get together socially. Is that the thought? It may be logistically impossible to sked two rooms close together at the same time so that we can meet together either at the start or end of the biz meetings and then also meet individually with our own group. So please, send me your thoughts on that.
6.) I'm not very tech savvy, but we've been trying to get a syllabus exchange for several years now. During an assessment review with AEJMC last week I asked if they could offer any help on getting such an exchange going and they suggested a web site. I don't think my school would sponsor such a site, but does anyone else have any ideas?
So it seems as if I asked more questions than offered anything. But let's talk.
Thanks for your time and patience.
Joe
1.) In my remarks when I was voted in as COMJIG head last week, I was remiss in not thanking Andris for the wonderful job he did as head of the interest group last year. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. It was great working with him this past year and I am also looking forward to working with our new officers this upcoming year. A special thanks, also, to Doug Fisher who maintains all things webby.
2.) At our meeting last week we talked about raising our profile. So when I get back from several meetings this afternoon I plan on e-mailing our good friends at TCU and asking them to mention us in their new online journal. I'm also going to ask them if they would be willing to co-sponsor a postcard mailing to get our name out there and try to increase submissions for panels and papers.
3.) And that brings me to this point: We really should be thinking about doing more at the mid-year meeting in Oklahoma and at the Southeast Colloquium (in Richmond next spring). Any ideas? In the past we have talked about shared panels and such. I think this is an opportunity to attract those eager grad students who can swell our ranks and get us thinking in new directions.
4.) We really should be doing more with diversity. I spoke with Heidi Flowers, the head of the PR/advertising division, because they are also looking to do a panel on a diversity issue. So this might be a way to pool talents and save a chip at December's chip auction/planning session. Any thoughts?
5.) I also spoke with Kirsten with CCJIG and we're both confused about our IG members' wishes for next year. Our impression was that since we share some members that we want to at least get together socially. Is that the thought? It may be logistically impossible to sked two rooms close together at the same time so that we can meet together either at the start or end of the biz meetings and then also meet individually with our own group. So please, send me your thoughts on that.
6.) I'm not very tech savvy, but we've been trying to get a syllabus exchange for several years now. During an assessment review with AEJMC last week I asked if they could offer any help on getting such an exchange going and they suggested a web site. I don't think my school would sponsor such a site, but does anyone else have any ideas?
So it seems as if I asked more questions than offered anything. But let's talk.
Thanks for your time and patience.
Joe
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)