Communication 221 is the one class every student needs
COLUMBUS, Ohio (Aug. 17) – Communication 221, reporting and editing for the news media, is one of the most beneficial classes available to students at Ohio State University. “Anyone who takes this class will become a better communicator,” said Dan Caterinicchia, a communication lecturer at OSU. “Being a better communicator is fundamental for any job.”
Available every quarter at OSU, Communication 221 is a fast past, intensive course filled with weekly news and Associated Press quizzes. Reporting and editing for the news media keeps students up to date with current world news and social media guidelines. The news media is ubiquitous, and knowing how to properly communicate is not only important, but necessary to succeed.
Communication 221 gives students the opportunity to develop a number of important skills including: developing a personal memoir, learning key interview techniques, writing in broadcast style, and doing a press release. Do all students need these kinds of skills? Yes, because every assignment students do in class incorporates unique writing activities crucial for anyone to be an effective communicator.
Caterinicchia believes the final project is what sets this class out from others in the School of Communication because it incorporates everything from video recordings and press releases to hard journalism pieces and sidebars. “The final project is the student’s opportunity to show everything they have learned throughout the quarter, said Caterinicchia. “More importantly, it’s the student’s choice.”
Closely allied with the School of Communication mission statement, Communication 221 is focused on helping all students gain the experience they need to become successful communicators. Caterinicchia summed up 221’s unique qualities in three words, “Challenging, informative, and beneficial.”
About
The School of Communication is dedicated and committed to helping every student achieve their goals. The overall goal is to devise an innovate School that is a leader in authority in specific areas of expertise, closely tied with the mission statement of the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences. This goal is achieved by having the best educators, professors, and instructors that will stop at nothing to help students succeed. The research and teaching programs within the school are rigid and focused on present and future directions of the field.
xxx
Joshua Cappannelli
joshmacaps@yahoo.com
523-689-7456
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Me, Myself, and I
Josh Cappannelli the world, the world Josh Cappannelli
COLUMBUS, Ohio, Aug. 12 – Some people believe that human perfection is unattainable, and they may be right, or they just don’t know Josh Cappannelli.
Cappannelli is smart, funny, studious, committed, dedicated, and handsome to say the least. He is the first one in the door and the last one to leave.
Dan Caterinicchia is a professor at Ohio State University and can’t stop raving about his star pupil. “Josh Cappannelli is one of the best students I have ever had. I would strongly recommend him for any class,” he said.
If that wasn’t enough, Cappannelli still stays focused on the importance of school. “Yeah I’m famous and popular, but I don’t forget that school comes first. An education is important to me and I know any class would love to have me,” he said.
About
Joshua Cappannelli came from humble beginnings, born and raised on a small farm in Manchester, N.H. The youngest out of 12 brothers and sisters, Josh always fought for attention. After a trip to Hollywood when he was 7, he was discovered by big time movie agent Ari Gold and never looked back. Since then he has starred in over 12 hit movies, produced two number one albums, and still finds time to study medicine at Ohio State University.
xxx
Joshua Cappannelli
513-786-6659
jcaps@yahoo.com
COLUMBUS, Ohio, Aug. 12 – Some people believe that human perfection is unattainable, and they may be right, or they just don’t know Josh Cappannelli.
Cappannelli is smart, funny, studious, committed, dedicated, and handsome to say the least. He is the first one in the door and the last one to leave.
Dan Caterinicchia is a professor at Ohio State University and can’t stop raving about his star pupil. “Josh Cappannelli is one of the best students I have ever had. I would strongly recommend him for any class,” he said.
If that wasn’t enough, Cappannelli still stays focused on the importance of school. “Yeah I’m famous and popular, but I don’t forget that school comes first. An education is important to me and I know any class would love to have me,” he said.
About
Joshua Cappannelli came from humble beginnings, born and raised on a small farm in Manchester, N.H. The youngest out of 12 brothers and sisters, Josh always fought for attention. After a trip to Hollywood when he was 7, he was discovered by big time movie agent Ari Gold and never looked back. Since then he has starred in over 12 hit movies, produced two number one albums, and still finds time to study medicine at Ohio State University.
xxx
Joshua Cappannelli
513-786-6659
jcaps@yahoo.com
Final Project Details
Tom Shwartz: I'll try to respond here with my thoughts on this issue, but if you'd like additional information from me, feel free to contact me.
1. Before the webimar, I had heard about most of the webinar's discussion. Generally, I think technology developed for the presentation of material in journalism media should be exploited to advance the public interest.
2. Here is a policy statement I had developed for the Lantern a while ago. It's just a proposal; it has not be approved. At the moment (and perhaps indefinitely), I'm the only one who supports this proposed policy.Journalists should report the news fully, fairly, accurately, quickly and ethically. The Lantern should continuously strive to make its incomplete journalism complete, its inaccurate journalism accurate and its unfair journalism fair, even after material is published. The Lantern should follow the long-standing traditions of the finest news media in prominently and promptly admitting to, apologizing for and correcting omissions, inaccuracies, poor judgment and other errors. Recognizing the impact its content can have on individuals, groups and institutions, the Lantern should use to the fullest the capabilities of its electronic archives by deleting, updating or otherwise improving a part or all of material that does not serve the public interest in its present form. It is important not to alter accurate history in the archives, but it is also important that the Lantern and its archives serve the public interest in maintaining important, accurate, legal and ethical information, not information for its own sake.
3. I think this is a judgment call for a journalist in any situation. For media-savvy sources, e.g., politicians and government and business leaders, no such warning is necessary. But I have always believed that journalists should be sensitive to media-unsavvy sources, e.g., children, people of limited intellectual capacity, uneducated or illiterate people, about the consequences of whether or how they cooperate with media interviews. I've always felt that -- as a matter of ethics -- journalists should be thorough in explaining why they want to interview a source before the interview. If judged useful to the source, the journalist should give a "Miranda warning."
I am also shceduling appoitments with Dr. McCluskey, Dr. Kraft. Dr Schwartz said he would also love to sit down or talk on the phone.
I will go over the same questions with the other doctorates, infact I will use Dr. Schwartz's thoughts and see if that elicites a different response.
I also am in the works of geting in touch with an online editor from the Plain Dealer, Gene Dubai.
I will ask her specific questions about online publication and their policy on unpublishing. If she has any examples of unpublishing in the job over the past couple years.
Here is a rough draft I wrote up for an extra credit assingment that I will expand on with the information I receive. I am doing a hard journalism piece, and will most likely do a sidebar.
Unpublishing: a word that may change journalism
Just because it is easy to remove digital content, does it mean we should?
At a time when the digital journalism landscape has changed everything we do- wider reach, faster speeds, and easier access- news organizations are finding they having even more problems with the content they publish online.
More and more news organizations around the world are receiving requests from people to ‘unpublish’ online content. According to Kathy English, public editor for the Toronto Star, to unpublish online content means, “To take down public content from an online news source.”
Now before deciding if it is ethical and practical to unpublish online content, news organizations have to understand why people want to take down content from online news sources. English says there are many reasons to why people want online content taking down, such as information that is inaccurate, unfair or outdated and privacy issues, but the biggest one is “source remorse.”
Source remorse is when a person gives a journalist information for any such reason and then later on request to have that information taken down, says English. “It’s not you, it’s me, like getting dumped on a bad day,” says Howard Finberg, host of the unpublishing webinar.
“Anyone who publishes has to think about unpublishing,” says English. For news organizations, it’s not always cut and dry. English says organizations have to weigh every publication between the possible harm it brings to the person who is requesting it to be taken down and the obligation that the news organization has to give its readers the truth.
English says it’s about fairness, “We have a responsibility to assure the ongoing accuracy of the information we publish.” And not only do we have to explain why we don’t unpublish something, says English, but “you have to unpublish for the right reasons, rare circumstances involving egregious error or violation of journalism ethics where it would be deemed necessary to remove content.”
And although the Toronto Star has a policy on unpublishing online content, but hasn’t published it to the public, English says all news organizations should have a policy. “Unpublishing online content should be carefully considered, in fairness to all,” says English, but stresses that source remorse is not a valid reason.
In the end English says that not one person should act as a censor and decide when to remove public content, but a group of minds, “unpublish by consensus.” And when you publish realize the consequences, “consider the implications of publishing content before publishing it, because news is easily accessible and lives forever,” says English.
1. Before the webimar, I had heard about most of the webinar's discussion. Generally, I think technology developed for the presentation of material in journalism media should be exploited to advance the public interest.
2. Here is a policy statement I had developed for the Lantern a while ago. It's just a proposal; it has not be approved. At the moment (and perhaps indefinitely), I'm the only one who supports this proposed policy.Journalists should report the news fully, fairly, accurately, quickly and ethically. The Lantern should continuously strive to make its incomplete journalism complete, its inaccurate journalism accurate and its unfair journalism fair, even after material is published. The Lantern should follow the long-standing traditions of the finest news media in prominently and promptly admitting to, apologizing for and correcting omissions, inaccuracies, poor judgment and other errors. Recognizing the impact its content can have on individuals, groups and institutions, the Lantern should use to the fullest the capabilities of its electronic archives by deleting, updating or otherwise improving a part or all of material that does not serve the public interest in its present form. It is important not to alter accurate history in the archives, but it is also important that the Lantern and its archives serve the public interest in maintaining important, accurate, legal and ethical information, not information for its own sake.
3. I think this is a judgment call for a journalist in any situation. For media-savvy sources, e.g., politicians and government and business leaders, no such warning is necessary. But I have always believed that journalists should be sensitive to media-unsavvy sources, e.g., children, people of limited intellectual capacity, uneducated or illiterate people, about the consequences of whether or how they cooperate with media interviews. I've always felt that -- as a matter of ethics -- journalists should be thorough in explaining why they want to interview a source before the interview. If judged useful to the source, the journalist should give a "Miranda warning."
I am also shceduling appoitments with Dr. McCluskey, Dr. Kraft. Dr Schwartz said he would also love to sit down or talk on the phone.
I will go over the same questions with the other doctorates, infact I will use Dr. Schwartz's thoughts and see if that elicites a different response.
I also am in the works of geting in touch with an online editor from the Plain Dealer, Gene Dubai.
I will ask her specific questions about online publication and their policy on unpublishing. If she has any examples of unpublishing in the job over the past couple years.
Here is a rough draft I wrote up for an extra credit assingment that I will expand on with the information I receive. I am doing a hard journalism piece, and will most likely do a sidebar.
Unpublishing: a word that may change journalism
Just because it is easy to remove digital content, does it mean we should?
At a time when the digital journalism landscape has changed everything we do- wider reach, faster speeds, and easier access- news organizations are finding they having even more problems with the content they publish online.
More and more news organizations around the world are receiving requests from people to ‘unpublish’ online content. According to Kathy English, public editor for the Toronto Star, to unpublish online content means, “To take down public content from an online news source.”
Now before deciding if it is ethical and practical to unpublish online content, news organizations have to understand why people want to take down content from online news sources. English says there are many reasons to why people want online content taking down, such as information that is inaccurate, unfair or outdated and privacy issues, but the biggest one is “source remorse.”
Source remorse is when a person gives a journalist information for any such reason and then later on request to have that information taken down, says English. “It’s not you, it’s me, like getting dumped on a bad day,” says Howard Finberg, host of the unpublishing webinar.
“Anyone who publishes has to think about unpublishing,” says English. For news organizations, it’s not always cut and dry. English says organizations have to weigh every publication between the possible harm it brings to the person who is requesting it to be taken down and the obligation that the news organization has to give its readers the truth.
English says it’s about fairness, “We have a responsibility to assure the ongoing accuracy of the information we publish.” And not only do we have to explain why we don’t unpublish something, says English, but “you have to unpublish for the right reasons, rare circumstances involving egregious error or violation of journalism ethics where it would be deemed necessary to remove content.”
And although the Toronto Star has a policy on unpublishing online content, but hasn’t published it to the public, English says all news organizations should have a policy. “Unpublishing online content should be carefully considered, in fairness to all,” says English, but stresses that source remorse is not a valid reason.
In the end English says that not one person should act as a censor and decide when to remove public content, but a group of minds, “unpublish by consensus.” And when you publish realize the consequences, “consider the implications of publishing content before publishing it, because news is easily accessible and lives forever,” says English.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
221 News Script
221 News Script
Economy, Weather and Sports
Welcome to Communication 221, I’m Joshua Cappannelli.
A disappointing jobs report last Friday has intensified speculation that the Federal Reserve could take steps this week to stimulate the faltering recovery.
The Fed's most dramatic move would be to purchase new mortgage-backed securities or Treasury bonds to lower interest rates.
Far more likely, many economists say, is that the central bank will take a middle-ground.
From the economy at home, to the weather abroad.
Yesterday, Moscow's chief health official reported that the daily mortality rate has nearly doubled in recent days, singling out the heat as the primary factor.
Independent doctors said a rise in mortality was to be expected for a heat wave in a northern city ill-equipped for such temperatures. Temperatures have been in the high 90s for weeks.
From hot weather to the hottest team in the N-F-L.
The Super Bowl champion New Orleans Saints visited the White House yesterday morning.
President Barack Obama lauded Saints coach Sean Payton for starting the second half of the Super Bowl with an onside kick.
A bold maneuver that helped trigger New Orleans' win over the Indianapolis Colts.
Obama said quote, "I make some tough decisions every day, but I never decided on an onside kick in the second half of the Super Bowl. That took some guts. ... I'm glad that thing went all right," end quote.
I’m Joshua Cappannelli. Thank you.
Economy, Weather and Sports
Welcome to Communication 221, I’m Joshua Cappannelli.
A disappointing jobs report last Friday has intensified speculation that the Federal Reserve could take steps this week to stimulate the faltering recovery.
The Fed's most dramatic move would be to purchase new mortgage-backed securities or Treasury bonds to lower interest rates.
Far more likely, many economists say, is that the central bank will take a middle-ground.
From the economy at home, to the weather abroad.
Yesterday, Moscow's chief health official reported that the daily mortality rate has nearly doubled in recent days, singling out the heat as the primary factor.
Independent doctors said a rise in mortality was to be expected for a heat wave in a northern city ill-equipped for such temperatures. Temperatures have been in the high 90s for weeks.
From hot weather to the hottest team in the N-F-L.
The Super Bowl champion New Orleans Saints visited the White House yesterday morning.
President Barack Obama lauded Saints coach Sean Payton for starting the second half of the Super Bowl with an onside kick.
A bold maneuver that helped trigger New Orleans' win over the Indianapolis Colts.
Obama said quote, "I make some tough decisions every day, but I never decided on an onside kick in the second half of the Super Bowl. That took some guts. ... I'm glad that thing went all right," end quote.
I’m Joshua Cappannelli. Thank you.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
President Clinton
Today at the White House Clinton denies alleged affair.
Clinton thanked everyone for coming.
Clinton said that he and his wife, Hill-a-re, have worked hard over the years in an effort to further the education system for children. Clinton is working on a budget that will reduce the class size nation wide to 18 in grades 1st-2nd-3rd.
Clinton said he will create a budget to build more schools.
Clinton said quote, “The hours from 3 p.m.-7p.m. are the most vulnerable hours for children, end quote.” Clinton said he is determined to help Americans succeed.
Clinton finished by looking in the camera and defiantly saying quote, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. La- win-ski,” end quote.
Clinton thanked everyone for coming.
Clinton said that he and his wife, Hill-a-re, have worked hard over the years in an effort to further the education system for children. Clinton is working on a budget that will reduce the class size nation wide to 18 in grades 1st-2nd-3rd.
Clinton said he will create a budget to build more schools.
Clinton said quote, “The hours from 3 p.m.-7p.m. are the most vulnerable hours for children, end quote.” Clinton said he is determined to help Americans succeed.
Clinton finished by looking in the camera and defiantly saying quote, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. La- win-ski,” end quote.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Final Project
My final project idea is to follow up on a "Unpublishing Webinar" I attended last week.
I have five interviews lined up with professore in the communication department. I plan to do a hard journalism piece on the webinar discussing it's main objectives.
I look to ask them what they know and have experienced with the term "unpublishing" in their work?
More importantly, as a editor what would there stance on the issue be?
Def: Unpublishing online content is becoming more relevant in society today and more and more organizations are having requests to unoublish material. The most common request to unpublish material is called "source remorse."
I plan to interview all of my sources and incorporate a picture of one of the doctorates with a possibly press release detailing the webinar on the day it happened.
I have five interviews lined up with professore in the communication department. I plan to do a hard journalism piece on the webinar discussing it's main objectives.
I look to ask them what they know and have experienced with the term "unpublishing" in their work?
More importantly, as a editor what would there stance on the issue be?
Def: Unpublishing online content is becoming more relevant in society today and more and more organizations are having requests to unoublish material. The most common request to unpublish material is called "source remorse."
I plan to interview all of my sources and incorporate a picture of one of the doctorates with a possibly press release detailing the webinar on the day it happened.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Extra Credit Unpublishing Paper
Joshua Cappannelli
Dan Caterinicchia
“Unpublishing” Online Content
Unpublishing: a word that may change journalism
Just because it is easy to remove digital content, does it mean we should?
At a time when the digital journalism landscape has changed everything we do- wider reach, faster speeds, and easier access- news organizations are finding they having even more problems with the content they publish online.
More and more news organizations around the world are receiving requests from people to ‘unpublish’ online content. According to Kathy English, public editor for the Toronto Star, to unpublish online content means, “To take down public content from an online news source.”
Now before deciding if it is ethical and practical to unpublish online content, news organizations have to understand why people want to take down content from online news sources. English says there are many reasons to why people want online content taking down, such as information that is inaccurate, unfair or outdated and privacy issues, but the biggest one is “source remorse.”
Source remorse is when a person gives a journalist information for any such reason and then later on request to have that information taken down, says English. “It’s not you, it’s me, like getting dumped on a bad day,” says Howard Finberg, host of the unpublishing webinar.
“Anyone who publishes has to think about unpublishing,” says English. For news organizations, it’s not always cut and dry. English says organizations have to weigh every publication between the possible harm it brings to the person who is requesting it to be taken down and the obligation that the news organization has to give its readers the truth.
English says it’s about fairness, “We have a responsibility to assure the ongoing accuracy of the information we publish.” And not only do we have to explain why we don’t unpublish something, says English, but “you have to unpublish for the right reasons, rare circumstances involving egregious error or violation of journalism ethics where it would be deemed necessary to remove content.”
And although the Toronto Star has a policy on unpublishing online content, but hasn’t published it to the public, English says all news organizations should have a policy. “Unpublishing online content should be carefully considered, in fairness to all,” says English, but stresses that source remorse is not a valid reason.
In the end English says that not one person should act as a censor and decide when to remove public content, but a group of minds, “unpublish by consensus.” And when you publish realize the consequences, “consider the implications of publishing content before publishing it, because news is easily accessible and lives forever,” says English.
Dan I didn’t get any interviews, but McClusky and Kraft both emailed back saying that would love to sit down with me and discuss next week. I would love to get all their input and use it for my final project, because I got a lot more ideas to write with or without the sources.
Dan Caterinicchia
“Unpublishing” Online Content
Unpublishing: a word that may change journalism
Just because it is easy to remove digital content, does it mean we should?
At a time when the digital journalism landscape has changed everything we do- wider reach, faster speeds, and easier access- news organizations are finding they having even more problems with the content they publish online.
More and more news organizations around the world are receiving requests from people to ‘unpublish’ online content. According to Kathy English, public editor for the Toronto Star, to unpublish online content means, “To take down public content from an online news source.”
Now before deciding if it is ethical and practical to unpublish online content, news organizations have to understand why people want to take down content from online news sources. English says there are many reasons to why people want online content taking down, such as information that is inaccurate, unfair or outdated and privacy issues, but the biggest one is “source remorse.”
Source remorse is when a person gives a journalist information for any such reason and then later on request to have that information taken down, says English. “It’s not you, it’s me, like getting dumped on a bad day,” says Howard Finberg, host of the unpublishing webinar.
“Anyone who publishes has to think about unpublishing,” says English. For news organizations, it’s not always cut and dry. English says organizations have to weigh every publication between the possible harm it brings to the person who is requesting it to be taken down and the obligation that the news organization has to give its readers the truth.
English says it’s about fairness, “We have a responsibility to assure the ongoing accuracy of the information we publish.” And not only do we have to explain why we don’t unpublish something, says English, but “you have to unpublish for the right reasons, rare circumstances involving egregious error or violation of journalism ethics where it would be deemed necessary to remove content.”
And although the Toronto Star has a policy on unpublishing online content, but hasn’t published it to the public, English says all news organizations should have a policy. “Unpublishing online content should be carefully considered, in fairness to all,” says English, but stresses that source remorse is not a valid reason.
In the end English says that not one person should act as a censor and decide when to remove public content, but a group of minds, “unpublish by consensus.” And when you publish realize the consequences, “consider the implications of publishing content before publishing it, because news is easily accessible and lives forever,” says English.
Dan I didn’t get any interviews, but McClusky and Kraft both emailed back saying that would love to sit down with me and discuss next week. I would love to get all their input and use it for my final project, because I got a lot more ideas to write with or without the sources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)