WRITING CULTURE 2012: Film, Food & Beyond

It seems the election’s heat spilled onto the realm of social media–especially evidently observed in twitter.

I was awed by the technology at first, about the way New York Times organized the multimedia and social media, everything blending well with one another. As soon as you click the button of -The Time’s Political Unit on Social Media, upper right hand corner from the politics section on its site, you will see the opinions of journalists about the currently ongoing election.

Twitter has been amazing in that it allows people to casually bring out and express their opinions on the election and the candidates. The social media has broken down the barrier between election issues and young people, because it is easy to “follow” the election phases, which can make the convention more engaging. I, myself, am honestly not familiar with the social media system. Also, I do not see me as a person who would follow the news on the election. But, mainly due to the convenience and the accessibility, I began to read and follow the comments made by the journalists–all thanks to the social media.

The New York Times reporters were so active posting about Democratic National Convention. From September 4^th through September 6^th, many NY Times reporters seem busy writing posts about democratic candidate’s activities. Due to styles of Twitter, the reporters tend to write short catchy sentences to grab reader’s attention.

Especially, Jodikantor’s writing style caught my eyes. Her writing style demolished the young people’s prejudice of election.

Many young people tend to avoid the election issue but her twitter really entertains the young people within just one sentence. She did not fully explained about the activities but we could just get ideas that she was trying to tell us. It was short but has everything that we needed to know.

The reporters seem to know what they are writing about and the comments are well-written with humor and it has touched me to have more interests in the issues. These reporters would influence reader because we can anticipate that the reporters have more information than we do, and because their comments could influence our thoughts and behaviors. Each one of follower is a voter and we could follow who you want to choose.

REUTERS/JESSICA RINALDI

      OK, I’m not a professional photographer or anything but I know good pictures when I see them and the ones in the photo slide show were subpar at best. I feel the pictures were supposed to be from the viewpoint of those in attendance at the Democratic National Convention. The New York Times wanted you to see the DNC from their eyes and if that’s the case the DNC looked boring as hell. Now don’t get me wrong, some photos were very powerful but some were poorly taken and made me feel like I was with some of the attendees bored as hell in Charlotte waiting for something fun to happen. I looked through the photos slideshow for each of the days of the DNC and decided to let you know about one Hit which was a memorable photo and one miss which was a memorable photo because it sucked.
DNC Day #1: Hit of the day is picture #23 showing Michelle Obama being greeted by a cheering crowd at the convention. The MISS of the day in that slide show was picture#4 which was a very amateur picture of a reporter’s legs with the caption “A television reporter broadcast from a spot on the convention floor”. The pic really looks like a 2 year old took it, and who knows, maybe one really did.
DNC Day #2: HIT of the day was a very provocative picture, it was picture #3 and let’s just say that there is a shadow that resembles a part of the males anatomy that rhymes with Venus (don’t believe me go check for yourself and post a comment and tell me if I’m right or wrong). The MISS of that slide show is the picture of Nancy Pelosi standing at the podium. Now the reason that it’s a MISS is because you don’t even know its Nancy Pelosi because all you see is her shadow and the bottom of her pants (real nice photography work).
DNC Day #3: The pics were pretty good, but of course there has to be a MISS (no slide show is perfect, except maybe mine but that’s another story). The hit for this one would have to be picture #27 which shows President Obama, the first lady and their two daughters. It’s a very beautiful picture that shows family unity and gives you such a warm tingly feeling. Now the MISS of this slide show is #17 which is a pic of Scarlett Johansson, now you may be asking yourself “how the heck can a pic of Sco-Jo be a MISS, everyone loves Sco-Jo”, well the pic only shows the back of her head and I’m not such a fan of hers that I can tell what the back of her head looks like but I’ll take their word that is was her(some of you Johansson fans could probably recognize her bun from anywhere but not me).
The most flawless slide show would have to be the one that showed BEHIND THESCENES OF THE DNC. Now those pictures were definitely professional and what made them stand out was the fact that they were in black and white which gave it a very historic feel. I truly wish whoever took those pics would have taken the pics of the rest of the DNC instead of letting a group of grade-schoolers run wild with their cameras which is what the majority of the pics in the slide show looked like. All in the all the photo slideshow wasn’t impressive and I expected a lot more from a respectable publication like the New York Times. Guess they need to hire some more interns; hope to see the announcement at the Starr Center in Baruch.

MULTIMEDIA ROUNDUP

Well, I will be honest and say that I did not hear any of the speeches of the DNC. Ok, ok, I’m going to be even more honest and say that I didn’t even watch the convention so this Media round up of all the speeches was perfect for a guy like me that wanted to hear what everyone was talking about.  It allowed me to select sections of the speeches that I wanted to hear so that I could act as if I heard the whole speech and really I just heard the juicy parts.  Out of all the social media the times tried to employ during the convention, this was by far the most useful.  I would like the thank the times for allowing a person that chose to watch Netflix on the night of the DNC the opportunity to act as if he watched every speech.  it made me proud to be an American(Insert salute here).

There was a time when I believed Twitter was just going to be some kind of fad, which would eventually die out. I was wrong. Twitter has become a great “news” source for many.  The New York Times took note of this and established a team of forces to cover the republican and democratic convention. Twitter was used as a platform for the masses to opine on the conventions. It became a pool of saturated opinions. Personally, I do not like to be sold on anything; I like to be given the facts and left to draw my own conclusions. The “facts” were presented with a bias undertone. But I guess that’s the point of Twitter to share one’s opinion with others. The problem is, a person who only gets their news from Twitter, may be misguided. The New York Times Twitter convention coverage was a microcosm of commentary newsrooms like CNN or Fox News, a sound bite of the facts, the rest opinion. Overall, journalists did a decent job delivering the information with their 140-character limitation.

The New York Times did an exceptional job with their multimedia “round-up” coverage. It was fairly accessible and it highlighted the key points of the conventions. The slideshow created a great rapport for the Democratic Party.

Bill Clinton is a Superhero. Barack Obama Invented Healthcare

Disclaimer: I think The New York Times’ coverage of the 2012 Democratic National Convention, specifically the Caucus Blog, was comprehensive and all inclusive. For all of last week it captured events as they unfolded and provided brief analysis of both Democratic and Republican rhetoric.

Though I did vote for President Obama in the 2008 election, plan on doing so in November, and have openly mocked Mitt Romney while in the company of registered Republicans,  I did have a few issues with the New York Times’ coverage of the convention. Especially if we consider it to be an esteemed member of traditional news,  the Times’ bias towards the Democratic camp is a bit distracting.

Everyone knows President Obama is the coolest guy to occupy the oval office, ever. We also know Mitt Romney is kind of a prick and that he is  representative of a small percentage of rather prickly Americans than perhaps any other presidential candidate. Ever.

We all know this like the back of our hands because we’ve been entrenched in what appears to be the longest campaign in United States history. You could say that the 2012 campaign began on Wednesday November 5, 2008 and rhetoric of the Caucus Blog reflects that.  It would have been nice to see the New York Times use their tarnish-proof image to add some legitimacy to blogging and try to appear neutral.

That is not to say that I didn’t enjoy the thorough reporting, it’s just so blatantly obvious who the writers are rooting for. In short,  I expected more from the New York Times.

Multimedia Roundup 

Where the Caucus Blog may not have been my cup of tea, the multimedia coverage was pretty impressive. Maybe this is the geek in me talking, but I think the New York Times is really using multimedia effectively to analyze the news, make it digestible, and link to sources. That is, afterall, the point of technology; to make our lives easier through efficiency. [/nerd]

Pieces like the breakdown of Bill Clinton’s speech is great for news junkies, politcos, and aspiring speech writers alike.   The additional commentary is short but allows the reader (or listener) just enough time to take in what is going on, and what the speaker (Clinton) is attempting to convey. I like it for no other reason than I think it really shows how great of an orator Bill Clinton is.

I tried listening to Bill Clinton’s speech uninterrupted late last week following the convention, but the cult of personality was a bit too much and I switched it off after ten minutes. The interactive feature allowed me, as a news consumer, to view his speech in context and appreciate it as a excellent example of public speaking rather than a sales pitch.

I thought this was awesome: Words Used at the Convention

There was a video that showed the various factions of the Democratic party as donkeys in different getups, but I can’t find it because I’ve exceeded my article limit. Boooo.

Photo credit: David Handschuh/New York Daily News

(PIC: latest news link)

The Live From Studio H team decided to look at the photo slide shows from the DNC. The Times separates the shows by day, so 3 days of the convention, equals 3 stunning sets of shots which depict an energetic convention, bathed in blue light and brimming with character.

An effective photo story , requires a whole host of complex things to come together in order for it to be a useful tool in telling the story of an event. It has to give you just enough context, some feeling of atmosphere, a view of what really was going on, both in front of and behind the scenes, and best of all, who are the characters involved. The Times coverage does all of these things and more.

Let me say this. It’s hard to take any type of picture at a political convention that doesn’t appear like an advertisement for the Democratic party. The room is designed that way. The lighting is blue, there are numerous banners and posters at every strategic angle, and all the speakers wear patriotic colors that don’t clash with the screens behind them. But The Times images still manage to throw up a few surprises, (and by surprises, I mean not just the same old typical shots that a myriad of other news sources are currently running with on their websites) the ‘Yes We Can’ sneakers and Obama 08 Yamaka spring to mind.

The day 1 shots of the entrance and outside areas add greatly in setting the scene in a way that TV crews can’t capture, and the images of the staff preparing the flooring and wiping down the podium intensifies the feeling that we are getting a fully rounded view of what it really takes to stage such a momentous event.

I wonder though, is there a missed opportunity for Obama here? Perhaps he should have drafted in Nicole Ritchie to stage an ‘America’s next top Obama wear designer’ competition. It’s clear from the photos that people continue to rock a plethora of Obama infused attire the likes of which I thought were relegated to the backs of the wardrobe since November 5th 2008. It’s clothing that defies any reasonable categorization on the basis of style or taste, but boy, it screams enthusiasm. This is simply about repping for the president in the best and most unique way you know how, and these photographs capture this and convention life as a whole in all its crazy, diverse beauty.

I would like to thank all of those who voted

Here and there I will catch up on the general idea of what is going on in politics, usually by default of having watched the evening news. I suppose the reason is because broadcasts tend to be biased, whether they are slightly or extremely biased is a debate in itself, and the fact is I am not that interested. Live blogging is an interactive way of seeing political coverage. See: New York Times. Those feeding the updates are including comments, reactions and other pieces of information that make things multi-faceted, exponentially so. The best part of this is that the presentation effectively helps those who are newly exploring the subject or have missed something, understand what is happening, in context. Television networks don’t have “time” for this kind of thing. Consumers should recognize though that there are ways to access both formats, even simultaneously, and with a little effort, for free.

Via, this New York Times site, you can see a breakdown of the speakers and what was discussed. This is the equivalent of chewing for the consumer so things are easier to swallow, but just because the smaller pieces have names doesn’t mean the consumer knows what they ate.

On a side note, when did the Democratic Convention become an awards show?

Politics/ Florida’s Vote

In a seven video look into the varying aspects of life in the I4 stretch of Florida, a swing state, video journalist, Erik Olsen’s crisp, clear, and beautifully lit videos, are a joy to watch. Warm, non intrusive and charming, his videography style has a way of allowing his subjects to really showcase their opinions and tell their truth to camera without it seems much thought of fear or judgment. Trust me, being non judgmental is hard to do when one voter sitting beneath a confederate flag states “I was a Democrat until Obama got in because I don’t like black people” or when the Freeman family line up evokes a scene from the TV show The Munster’s (such is their rather scary choice of hairstyle and all black clothing)

But odd and offensive subjects aside (yes grandma, that includes you wearing the Super Bitch hat) overall, the people chosen are a diverse and engaging bunch, with many of the interviewees like Jeanette Ocasio, a Democrat who represents the Hispanic vote, or Alexander and Christian, the teen Super Pac Republicans, coming across as really likeable. The overall impression that remained was that no one really likes Romney all THAT much, and few people have the same fervor for Obama that was stirred up for 4 years ago. I for one have a taste for some chicken empanadas and an ice-cold mojito, so I’m off to Habana Outpost in Brooklyn to get away from all this election coverage, after all, I can’t vote in the darn thing anyway!

Photo Courtesy of  the NYTimes

I was drawn to this blog about former President Clinton because of the title, “Clinton Was a Bipartisan President, Except When He Wasn’t“. I didn’t know what bipartisan meant until I looked it up and found it’s meaning to be somewhat intriguing. Bipartisan means, of, relating to, or involving members of two parties. The photo above depicts Clinton talking about both parties with his hand gestures as saying we can co-exist. As I continued to read the blog from The Caucus, it seemed right to refer to President Clinton as a bipartisan president when he wanted to be. I would say President Clinton was the highlight of the DMC with his unanticipated speech nominating President Obama for a second term. As a first time reader of any sort of political blog, I found myself wanting to keep on reading and not just giving up at the first few sentences. The tone in this blog is appropriate for someone like myself who is not into politics.

“In that sense, the speech was a vivid reminder of Mr. Clinton’s famed capacity for juggling many different ideas, personas and narratives, and along the way rewriting the history of his own presidency. The story line of a relatively bipartisan era when Democrats and Republicans came together to overhaul welfare, balance the budget and expand the economy profoundly oversimplifies a much more complicated, messier presidency.”, as blogged by Peter Baker. President Clinton by far was in deed a president like no other. listening to Clinton’s speech and then reading about it gave me a little hope that maybe there is more to our future and the future of our little ones.  

I particularly like the photo with President Obama graciously embracing former President Clinton with a warm hug after his powerful speech. You can see Obama’s appreciation to his predecessor as he closes his eyes and accepts what Clinton expressed in his speech.  

Photo Courtesy of the NYTimes

The whole slide show was entertaining to look at and take in what the people of South Carolina were able to see front row and carry with them for the rest of their lives.

I definitely am not one to talk politics with anyone let alone read about it on my own. This weekend I caught up on the Caucus blog on NYTimes.com and I can’t say I was uninterested. The Caucus blog did a very good job on covering the campaign of both the Republican and Democratic parties. But of course, to no surprise of mine, Obama was definitely in the center of attention since after all the New York Times is a more liberal publication and would give him more attention than his running mate, Mitt Romney.

The post that intrigued me the most was the article with the famous cover photo that was printed on nearly every single major newspaper across the nation of Obama being hug-lifted by a pizza man. Obama, trying to get some undecided voters to join Team Obama, went down to Florida to advocate his health care plan. In doing so, he bashed opponent Mitt Romney and his vice president candidate Paul Ryan is saying their proposed health care strategies will just make their lives much worse. One thing I do not like about politics is the bashing and I am pro-Obama all the way but maybe that was a bit more than he needed to say. Nonetheless, it’s politics and everything is fair game. Back to the story, the now famous pizza man, Scott Van Duzer, found some discomfort with his freshly acquired fame as he was bombared with hundreds of comments on his Yelp! page, both good and bad.

Of course, this blog is consisted of many articles pro-Obama and pro-Romney, yet through reading many of these I could only get the feeling that this blog was mainly an Obama cheerleader. The Nicki Minaj article where she tweets Obama saying “Thank you for understanding and creative humor Mr. President, the smart ones always do”, a reply to a public misunderstanding on her lyrics in a song, is a perfect example. Not only does this article promote Obama’s candidacy but it also ebbs Romney’s with the implication that these “smart ones” should have understood that her preaching for Romney in the song was a complete joke. Nonetheless, the caucus was filled with many good posts, some more over the top than others but definitely needed to be a little less “bashy”.

The multimedia coverage on the other hand was definitely more objective coverage than the caucus blog but again leaned more towards Obama. This portion of the Election 2012 section on NYTimes.com was filled with pictures and videos of Obama and Obama supporters. There was a slideshow of the backstage images during the Nation Democratic Convention however I found it interesting that there was no slideshow for the Republic side. But it was definitely a lot less bias than the blog. Many pictures from both sides were provided and videos as well. A very neat feature was the interactive one that tells you what words were said more by each candidate. Pretty much for reasons that tell you which topic each candidate would focus on more such as jobs, tax and energy as well as other friendlier words like family and the American dream. This was an excellent demonstration of last week’s conventions and public opinions through multimedia.