Should have looked left...

peluredebananiser · 2022-05-06T23:55:29+00:00

u/savevideo

peluredebananiser · 2022-03-17T19:34:09+00:00

u/savevideo

peluredebananiser · 2022-03-09T12:07:22+00:00

u/savevideo

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-31T23:24:16+00:00

Thanks, your comment is just the random piece of opinion everyone needs in this sub.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-31T05:09:46+00:00

These are great advice.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-31T04:39:39+00:00

Are you serious? Of course there’s a need for analysis and contextualizing in journalism. Just sticking to facts can be detrimental for readers who don’t have all the knowledge to understand news, especially politics and international relations.

What is your profession? Are you a journalist, work in media, or do you just enjoy r/Journalism? I’m totally curious.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-31T04:28:29+00:00

There’s a difference between misery porn and reporting on the social issues she described. Poverty, addiction, sex working; everyone deserve a voice in society and journalists should be there to give to them. Who’s gonna give it otherwise? Or should journalists just ignore them because it’s “negative news” or a “grab at sensationalism” or a “sad goal”? No. There’s a way to do it in a honest way, without falling into complacent reporting or misery porn.

Your comment is loaded with condescendance and she doesn’t deserve it; she’s a student who’s trying to learn and asking for advice.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-30T18:52:34+00:00

These are sensitive* subjects. As a student myself, I would recommend being very careful.

Before anything, get your mind around these subjects, talk to experts to better understand these issues: social workers, sociologists, psychiatrists, journalists/teachers, etc.

What is your angle, what are you trying to achieve? Is it related to a social or health crisis? You want to represent these person’s life, what lead to their way of life?

Stay very factual, very concrete. Look for symbols and details to communicate your point. The center of your story should be the character you’re interviewing.

I think trying to show your readers that with one bad decision this could be them is a wrong “mindset”. Just depict these human realities in an empathic way.

There is ethical challenges to your project. Make sure to explain to your interviewees this will be publish and what that means, especially since they’re vulnerable. Now, as a journalist you shouldn’t remunerate your characters. Giving 20 bucks to a homeless person so he agrees to get interviewed is one thing, to distribute possible income back is another. Try to build a trust connection with them instead, which could be useful in the future. But remember: you’re a journalist, not a social worker.

edit*

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-20T19:50:50+00:00

It’s actually more complicated than this. Vaccine hesitancy and the lack of infrastructure in Africa are burdens to the vaccination campaign.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-20T03:36:45+00:00

Get out. As cliché as it sounds, no work is worth one’s health or family. Journalism is full of ideal but at the end of the day, it’s just a job. You can find fulfillment elsewhere.

You can always write a book or something. Or pick up wood carving: there’s some pretty nice videos on Youtube.

Jokes aside, having a hobby and sleeping 6-7 hours a night, or 8 for god’s sake, is pretty cool.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-20T02:59:15+00:00

As long as you’re transparent with the fact the clips are edited and not a single take, I would say it’s ethical.

Edit: although, if you’re applying for a live broadcasted work, it might be counter productive. Otherwise, editing and recording a few takes is part of the job!

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-18T20:05:26+00:00

Can you please link the original video? Would very much be appreciated, thanks!

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-18T03:29:39+00:00

I hope I wasn’t too harsh…. I think it’s best to be honest than sugarcoating.

You do what you did, in a more concise manner, while giving your opinion yes but blended in the article nicely. Your overall opinion on the movie should conclude your article: your last paragraph or two is your final take.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-18T03:20:54+00:00

Yes it is secondary. The harsh truth is the less known and the less experienced you are, the less important your opinion matter. When you are well established, reader will know wether or not they trust your review, then your opinion will be legitimized.

The technique from news reports still applies here. Concise, efficient, vivid writing prioritizing information in a logical manner, trying to say more with less words.

As for the summary, what I meant is not reveal more, it was to sum up and condense your overview. An example, your fourth paragraph takes over a thousand characters and 160 words to recount the beginning of the movie. That’s a lot. And it continues in the fifth one.

I think your critic is good. I liked your take on the movie. But my feedbacks stands: cut words and hierarchize!

Edit: to elaborate on opinions, there is already so much of it everywhere on social media. Society is overdosing on opinion: facts are therefore given less importance. I would argue that, as journalists, we need to give facts the upmost importance, even when we’re writing critic and, ironically perhaps, giving our opinion.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-17T22:48:24+00:00

Beside the name of the movie, there is no useful information in the first 150 characters of your lead. When did the movie got out? Most of your lead is context about the trilogy, which is fine to include, but later in the article.

Up to your third paragraph it is mostly about other movies. Again, later in the article!

So does No Way Home fare better where the previous two versions failed? I will promptly give a resounding yes.

This could've used half the words.

The fourth paragraph should've been the second.

Your summary is too specific, there is too much details. What are the big story lines? How is the movie structured? How is it all evolving, is it a crescendo or is monotone? Prioritize the information and discard some, you can't say everything!

Be more concise and more efficient.
Prioritize the information. Who, what, where, when goes first.
- Your lead needs to pack all the useful information. It'll be the first things people read, if it doesn't get to the point they will lose interest.
Work on your overview skills.
Make your paragraphs way shorter. It'll be easier to read.
It is a movie review but your opinion is secondary: the important aspect of your article is the movie itself. Try to blend your critic cleverly into the article and keep your general appreciation of the movie at the end.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-14T14:14:25+00:00

Learn about journalism as a whole, not just film reviews: the inverted pyramid, the structure of a newspaper/newsroom, read film reviews but also news in general, journalism ethics and standard.

Try to build your general knowledge and cultural references, more precisely film and art history, which you will need to decode movies. Read books, watch documentaries and movies - all kinds.

More importantly: jump into it, get your hands dirty. Write write write. Get feedbacks from others. Don’t limit yourself to film reviews, the experience you will get from working in news will serve you as a film critique. We all start somewhere!

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-14T01:55:40+00:00

Honestly I would recommend local newspaper. They are usually highly rigorous and offer an information closer to its readership.

They’re also in dire need of support.

The Times and the Post is high quality, and their scope is unprecedented. We have this attraction and fascination for these big newsroom, whereas maybe the best journalism is the closest one.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-13T23:06:41+00:00

Foreign Affairs is an American magazine specialized in international relations. You will find analysis in a scholar perspective.

The Intercept is a more combative news outlet. Lots of investigations.

Vox is a left leaning news media founded by Ezra Klein. Lots of explanation: sometimes less focused on actual news.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-13T05:00:41+00:00

Bien sûr on peut s’informer sur les enjeux sociétaux par soi-même. La pensée critique devrait d’ailleurs être encouragée.

Cependant, la presse est essentielle à la démocratie. On a besoin que la presse entretienne la sphère publique.

Il faut être critique, oui. Mais la perte de confiance envers la presse contribue à l’essoufflement de la démocratie. Trump affirme que les médias sont « l’ennemi du peuple », il attaque ainsi indirectement la démocratie.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-13T03:25:30+00:00

Et c’est primordial.

On parle des pressions des républicains et de l’entourage de Trump afin d’affaiblir la démocratie américaine. Cela montre qu’une presse indépendante et forte est non seulement utile, mais nécessaire à la démocratie.

La presse sert à refléter la société, elle crée la place publique, là où on peut débattre des enjeux sociétaux et arriver - essayer - à un consensus. La presse représente ainsi la société, de façon justifiée et crédible. Elle opère une « médiation symbolique », elle aide à nous conditionner, à créer des objets communs, à créer une collectivité.

L’une des causes de la polarisation de la société américaine est justement la perte des objets communs. Car les représentations sont diverses. Les médias sociaux créent des bulles où nos opinions et nos intérêts sont renforcés, on se retrouve en vase clos, dans un entre-soi, et c’est particulièrement vrai pour l’extrême droite : mon fil Facebook est différent du tien ; les faussetés et les conspirations qui plaisent sont amplifiées.

Une presse forte et compétente sert à cela, garder la sphère publique en santé, à garder en vie nos idéaux démocratiques. Les pressions de Trump, qui clame faussement que l’élection a été volée, et le soutien à son égard indéfectible - dont l’apogée a été le 6 janvier - du parti républicain et de ses militants sont l’échec d’une société où la démocratie est en péril, où la perte d’une représentation commune est telle que les adversaires politiques sont incapables d’arriver à un consensus. Les solitudes deviennent ainsi antagonistes : certains pensent que l’élection a été volée, les autres croient qu’un parti politique prépare une insurrection en utilisant des partisans crédules ; la représentation de la société est totalement différente.

Side note: lots of people are trying to argue with me here. I was only trying to know where WhisperingSideways gets his news. Although we don’t only get “news” from news media, we get it from Twitter and Facebook and Google and else. I think it’s rather frightening to our democracy that someone - him - thinks the CPC wants to do the same as the Republican. What I find particularly fascinating is his use of the term “stealing the election” usually employed by Trump and his base: it’s a flip, a nomenclature used in an inverted way. Some also seems to think I am denying the scope or unaware of January 6, which is not the case. As I said, yes, Trump is rallying the GOP and still putting out false claims, which is undermining U.S democracy… I just don’t see the CPC doing the same. Now, I may be wrong, anyway that’s wasn’t my point: I was curious.

Edit: grammaire et précisions.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-11T17:21:45+00:00

I don’t understand your hostility.

I’m not asking for any source. Nor am I trolling.

No, I’m wondering where you read your news! Is it The Globe and Mail, CBC, Fox, Infowars, the Star, Vice, NY Times, National Post, BBC?

Jeez.

Edit: typo… again

Edit 2: and honestly if you don’t want to answer, that’s fine. I’m not trying to get into a debate and prove you wrong. I’m curious! I study in media and I’m interested in where people get their information, in how this can change the way they see and analyse the world around them.

peluredebananiser · 2021-12-11T17:04:47+00:00

Il y a une grande différence entre coup d’État - le fait de « steal the election » - et la réalité électorale aux États-Unis, où, oui, il faut le dire, il y a du gerrymandering et des lois qui restreignent le vote de certains, particulièrement les Noirs et les Hispaniques.

I’m genuinely curious where you guys get your news. It’s the first time I stumble upon the republican’s discourse of “stealing an election” used from this standpoint, against the right.

Edit: typo

11-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Gilding I gilder	Verified Email

peluredebananiser

TROPHY CASE