Friday, December 17, 2010

Opinion

Julia O'Malley gave thourough details of where the event was held, and what it looked like outside. But once she got inside she doesn't give any details, expect for the woman who escorted her out. We do not know if she actually got to speak to any of Miller's supporters or not. She does give detail of the pseudo conversation she had with the campaign worker.

O'Malley also gave her opinion of what really happened at the event, even if she doesn't come out and explicitly say so. She was removed from the event because she was a journalist. It was assummed that O'Malley was there to garner information that would harm Miller. Miller's campaign worker never stopped to think that O'Malley might be there to gather information that could have helped Miller's campaign. O'Malley points out that Miller's campaign had a history of this type of behavior, and that they must have a no media policy at all events.

In an update to the story, O'Malley received an apology email from the campaign member, and the campaign invited her to attend a future event. However, O'Malley has her doubts as to how serious the campign is about their invitation. She expresses doubt regarding the welcoming attitude they attempt to express.

Overall, O'Malley gathered great details about what the event looked like, but none about what she saw in the event except for the campaign worker that escorted her out. If she really wanted to talk to voters, I am sure she had time to speak to at least one before she left. This is information that really should have been included in the article. It is an opinion piece, and O'Malley expresses her opinion on the treatment of the media by Miller's campaign, but this is information that was already known. She should have attempted to provide more details about event and then moved into how things changed and her removal from the event. This is not an overt opinion piece, which is refreshing to see. She provides facts and lets the reader draw their own conclusion, sort of.

This story does follow a different format than the one I previously wrote on, and it does need to be mentioned that it takes one skilled in the craft of journalism and the art of writing to be able to change their writing style and be as versatile as Ms. O'Malley is. When she writes she invokes emotion, no matter what style she is writing in. I am interested in following her stories in the future because of the manner in which she gathers detail information and presents it in an interesting manner.

Newspaper Feature

Many stories like the one written by Julia O'Malley go uncovered. O'Malley took the time to ask specific questions with each of these people. She listened to what they said to her in return. Then she took those details and turned them into an article that was well-written and drew people into it.

Personally it left me wanting to know more specific details. I know that she has only so many words to use when writing a news article. If it were a longer story, or the length of a short story there would have been space enough for all the details. This in itself is also a sign of a good writer who has worked hard to master the art.

O'Malley covered a story that involved conflict, but a conflict that was resolved peacefully. The talking took place between the parties involved, not them and every media outlet in the world. Once a resolution was reached then apologies were said and permanent changes made. This is not the story of Don Imus who had to be fired and rehired because of offending comments. There was no press conference calling for their apology. O'Malley got all of these details, and many more, and delivered them to the reader is an manner that creates interest and stirs emotiions.

Murray would say that O'Malley has found her balance with craft and art; she excells at both. She was able to capture the emotions and deliver them to the audience with the feeling attached to them. Many writers do not know how to convey strength and happiness. They want to state it, not describe it. O'Malley used a wealth of quotes and description of actions, and this truly conveyed the feelings of the persons involved to her audience.

O'Malley also wrote about the positive outcomes resulting from the way the situation was handled. She told the reader how the community benefited from the education the DJs received. She also described how their radio show benefited from the manner in which the situation was handled.

O'Malley covered a story that would not have been covered by many other journalists. There is no scandal, nothing was covered up. It was the story of a woman that was offended by comments made by a couple of DJs, and meeting with them and causing these men to see things from another point of view and how their actions affected other people. This is an inspirational story, it makes the reader feel better about society in general.

Overall, O'Malley did a great job listening to the people she interviewed and recording the details of their actions. She wrote the story in an engaging manner, she drew the audience in and held their attention.

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Analysis of Article in New York TImes Regarding the Forclosure Freeze

David Streitfeld wrote an article in the New York Times on October 14, 2010. In this article he reported on the case that kicked off the mortgage forclosure freeze. In his article he interviewed Mrs. Nicolle Bradbury and her attorney's at Pine Tree Legal Assistance, Geoffrey S. Lewis and Thomas A. Cox.



According to the article, Mrs. Bradbury defaulted on her mortgage loan after getting it refinanced. She is in fault for not making her payments. However, the actual story here is the processes that her mortgage company used when they forclose on a house. GMAC was having people who had no information about the process forclosing on mortgages. They were basically rubber stamping the forclosures in the same manner that they rubber stamped the mortgages to begin with.

At the beginning of the article Streitfeld gave a physical description of the Bradbury's home. He stated that the house is "blue-gray and weathered." That the "porch is piled with furniture and knickknacks awaiting the next yard sale," and that "in the driveway is a busted pickup truck." These are details that Streitfeld received through physical observation.


There was much information that Streitfeld obtain through reading. It appears that he gained information from several written sources. These sources include the internet, court files, and other news articles. Streitfeld stated "Every attorney general in the country is participating in an investigation into the flawed paperwork and questionable methods behind many of them." This information would be gained from news outlets, and public records of court files. Streitfeld also writes about the Senate hearing that is scheduled to investigate the problems associated with the forclosure crisis. This information he would have gained from the U.S. Senate website. It also seems that Streitfeld also received his information from GMAC documents and previous statements made by their employees, representatives, and attorneys. The statements made by the presiding judge in the Bradbury's forclosure case would have been obtained from the court documents and files.



It is very likely that Mr. Streitfeld spent a minimum of a week, but more likely 2-3 weeks researching the written material and interviewing sources. I believe that his time was well spent because of the wealth of information he was able to provide to the pulic regarding the processes of GMAC and other large mortgage companies. The details provided give readers knowledge that they didn't have previously. I do think that the story could have focused more on GMAC and their horrendous practices rather than a family that lost their income and stopped making payments. It is not GMAC's fault that the Bradbury's stopped making their payments two years ago, and in most cases the Bradbury's would already have lost their house. The Bradbury's story does give the national forclosure crisis a face and makes the story more personal. The details allow the individual reader to relate to what is happening in a different part of the country.



Streitfeld was not able to really get both sides of the story. However, this was not his fault. GMAC did not return calls to discuss the matter. He did get many of his facts from the court records, which makes it more objective than if he had only received his information from the Bradbury's and their attorneys. It also appears that he did not over play the financial situation of the Bradburys. He stated their situation in a plain to the point manner, rather than making it sound like they had been abused by GMAC.



I think that Streitfeld could have been more successful with his story if he had focused more on GMAC and their business practices. They issued mortgages to people who they knew would not be able to keep up with the payments. On top of the mortgage, in many cases, they issued a loan to allow the homeowner make repairs to the home they purchased. This needs to be brought to light better than it was in this article.

Murray states, "Art is first craft." This means that reporting is the craft of journalism. The craft is listening and recording details. This is something that can be honed and one can become better at it. The writing aspect of journalism is the art. Writing in any form is art, it has to be polished, look nice, and read well in order for the audience to read it throughly and enjoy it. The craft and art of reporting and writing are very important to all journalists. I believe that a journalist has to be able to master both the craft and the art of journalism. If a reporter can listen well and pick up details that others cannot, but this reporter is a poor writer he/she will not do well as a journalist. The same is true for a reporter that can write but does not gather the proper details or amount of information for an article will not go far in their career either. In order to be a successful journalist you have to master the art and the craft.