Stardom Awaits (Bleugh! Bleugh!)

I volunteered to help cover the 2012 state election for 31Digital last Saturday, and somehow ended up on TV? (I'd assumed I'd just be finding results and election stuff for the professional presenters). I wasn't actually prepared, at all, to speak in front of a camera (as evinced by my attire), so I think  I did quite well, especially since I was given the material 2 minutes before-hand.

Clearly, with my poise and elocution and stumbling and pausing and bleughing I am destined to be a star.

Media Usage Diary

I Tried To Think of a Good Heading But All I Could Think of Was This

TL;DR: I spend too much time on Tumblr and I don't care about Facebook.

Our main assessment piece for JOUR1111 (apart from successfully running a blog) was to monitor our media usage for ten days, then compare it to the class average, while discussing any other salient points/factors/journalistic methods we had a mind to. So, without any further ado, I present the findings of my media usage diary!

 First, let me show you what I monitored (you can also infer from the graph what I defined as 'media' under the guidelines of this assessment).

Those figures are my total media consumption over ten days. To make it easier for you, I also graphed the average amount of time I spent (in minutes) on these media each day.

All up, this is about 250 minutes of media usage per day, or a little over four hours (and I haven't even included books in here, that's at least another hour per day). 

Sadly enough, over a quarter of that figure is achieved through a site called Tumblr. However, on Tumblr I run several blogs and receive knowledge on international events and campaigns, as well as social movements, and keep in touch with international friends and also look at memes and funny pictures. At least, that's how I justify it to
myself. 

It should be noted in my graph that neither online nor traditional forms of news media are presented. Put simply, this is because I ... don't read the news (in a  conventional sense). As I mentioned, I get my news from Tumblr (also from Twitter, and very occasionally Facebook, which I'll go into more detail on later), so I feel like I don't need to. Tumblr is more than just a hipster site run to give me access to faceless people in dresses and angsty text messages, it's my portal, however unconventional to the outside world.

Before I talk about TV usage, I should mention how I was raised with TV (or more precisely, how I wasn't). Growing up, the only TV station I was allowed to watch was the ABC, and the TV was turned off at 6pm. This might explain why today my tv average is so low.
The average response given by the JOUR1111 cohort to the question "How much tv do you watch most days (both broadcast and online)" was 1 - 2 hours (closely followed by 60+ minutes). I rounded this to 90 minutes per day when comparing my data. As you can see, my average viewing per day was significantly lower, at only a little over one hour of TV per day. I suspect this relates to how people get their news - 71% of the JOUR1111 cohort said that TV was one of the main sources of the news media they consume, so they would need to tune in more often to stay updated. As I've mentioned, I get my news online, or on the radio. The only 'tv' I watch is online, on ABC Iview, Where the ABC streams its shows for its online viewers. Thus, I don't get the updates, the news, the personalities (or the ads) that regular TV viewers get. I just get my show. I think that's a good thing.

My radio consumption is another area of media usage that is significantly lower than the cohort average. It would be lower still, but the radio is on when I work, which increases the time I spend listening to radio greatly. However there is one radio segment that I nearly always hear in the morning, when I'm on my way to uni, and that segment is Mornings, on 612. I listen to Mornings because it  presents me with interesting information, the morning news, and funky songs to sing along with, or listen to in bewilderment. And all this without the usual boring celebrity gossip, which unfortunately dominates the FM, commercial stations. And I am not alone in getting some of my news on air - 39%, over one third, of my cohort said the radio is one of the main ways they get their news. When my cohort - a young, hip and trendy generation of internet users - say that they listen/watch over 2 and a half hours of tv and radio per day, I think it is clear that 'old' media is not in the danger some fear it to be.

But now we come to the embarrassing graph:

I spend more than an hour longer on the internet, per day, than the average JOUR1111 student. And this figure was mapped when I was busy with assignments, this may not actually be my average. The other thing to keep in mind as I talk about my media usage is that I only spend about 7 minutes per day on Facebook.
Read that again: I spend about 7 minutes per day on Facebook.
So how do I manage to spend so long on the internet if I'm not doing the stereotypical 2 hours a day on Facebook? I have no idea.
When talking about the obscene amount of time I spend on the internet, I should first give you some background on my family:

• My mother makes her living on computers, creating websites and web indexes for companies, herself, etc.
• My father makes his living working IT for various big corporations.
• Counting working equipment only, we have 11 computers for a family of 5. One of my family members is only 9 years old and he has a computer and a laptop. That's how computer happy we are. We also have 3 tablets.
• So I grew up in an environment where getting all your information from the internet and spending the day on a computer was normal. As a child, I knew that I could make an entire living off the net.

 So it's understandable that I spend the majority of my time on a computer (on the internet): that's what I was raised with. I get my news, my interesting facts, my funny pictures, my personalities, my stories, my games and my friends on the internet, all without moving from my chair. And that convenience is incredible, even if at times I'm worryingly dependent on a stable wi-fi connection.


Now for a discussion of Facebook and Twitter.

I spend about a quarter of an hour on Facebook and Twitter combined, every day. Twitter I use primarily to skim through the news, as I follow organisations such as ABC Radio, Reuters News and  612 Brisbane. Obviously, tweets won't give me all the detail a proper, leisurely read through a newspaper would, but the hook is often enough to get me to click the link available and read the article in full. It also lets me check up on what my favourite people are doing (when I say favourite people I mean Stephen Fry, Spencer Howson, Bernadette Young, the few friends I have cool enough to use Twitter, the fake Queen and a few webcomic creators).

Again, this convenience is incredible, and is what helped make Twitter a great news and social networking site.

Facebook is a different story entirely - I only follow my friends (at this point in time I only have a 44 friends on Facebook) or people who's contact details I need. I didn't friend everyone in my graduating year of high school, or people I knew from primary school (although this didn't stop them trying to friend me). This means that my dashboard doesn't update often, so  I don't need to spend half an hour every day scrolling just to see what everyone's been up to over the past 12 hours. Also, I only joined Facebook 4 months ago. I've never been interested in it. The only thing I find it truly useful for, apart from keeping contact details and leaving messages for friends, is staying in touch with my relatives who are scattered across the country. And that's why it terrifies me when I see friends who have 376 'friends', and tell me, quite seriously, that they spend 2 hours a day on Facebook alone. I don't even spend that amount of time on Tumblr. That's really all I have to tweet on the subject of Facebook.

So to sum up: I am (close to) your typical uni student. I watch a lot of TV, I listen to the radio, I do things on the internet for long periods of time without a break the key is to delete your browsing history. What does this mean for journalism, if I'm to be a journalist in the future? Well, my guess is that TV and radio will be put on simmer for a time, giving the internet its chance in the limelight. I'm not saying that TV and radio will be forgotten - that's crazy, especially since we can access TV and radio through the internet, and the two mediums are continually adapting and fighting to stay relevant in an age when the news cycle is constantly accelerating. 

I am, however, worried about the long-term viability of newspapers. Newspapers sales are slowly but surely dropping. To combat this, news sellers are taking their content online - I've talked about some of the possible ramifications of this move in more depth in previous posts - and I'm sure this will be effective (to how great an extent I simply can't guess). But I will be sad to see the end of the great broadsheets in Newsagents (what will we call them then?), because there's nothing quite like holding a newspaper in your hands.

Conversations With Richard Fidler (and Steve Austin, also a cool dude)

It's my turn to blather!
Said the lecturer to the students.

This week we had a recorded lecture, instead of a talk in the war room. This was highly appropriate, as this lecture was about sound, specifically, radio. And when I say lecture, I mean an interview with Richard Fidler (of Conversations fame on 612 (and also DAAS fame)) and Steve Austin (Mornings, also on 612).

I have to say, it was mildly disappointing we couldn’t see them in person, as I was hoping to make joke about my parents liking Richard in DAAS before I was even born, much less entering tertiary education. But I digress.

The Conversation with Richard Fidler

It's funny because his radio segment is called 'Conversations with Richard Fidler'

If you buy this radio you loose all your basic human rights.

Obviously I’m not going to write a transcript of the interview for you to read. It would make more sense for you to just listen to the interview than for me to do that. But here’s the few gems of knowledge I picked up from Richard in the interview:

·      Radio is a very different medium – especially from tv, especially in that it is a much more intimate medium.

·      The important thing is to make listeners feel included in the conversations you’re having – this is your job as a presenter. If they don’t feel included or interested they’re going to get bored and tune in to a better station. Then your ratings go down the drain and shortly after so does your show.

·      Conventionally, a radio interview is about 7 minutes – any longer and you may start to bore the listener, any shorter and they may not get the full details and emotion.

·      You really need to be interested in what your interviewee is talking about. For Richard at least, when he’s bored in an interview and tries to cover, he comes off weird and creepily intense.

Would you trust this man if all that separated you was a table and two mikes?

·      Pre-production is very important in getting a feel for your segment and interviewee. You really need (at least some) preparation for your interview/segment, whatever, so you know you’ve got the material to cover the whole thing.

·      With longer interviews, it’s important to give your interviewee the space to talk, to collect their thoughts, to work through things. Importantly, always remain friendly, interested and enthusiastic towards both your interviewee and your listeners. (Obviously, don’t head into the creepily intense zone I mentioned previously)

And the final nuggets of joy:

·      Worldliness is good: keep reading, keep asking questions, expose yourself to the thoughts and opinions of people that you don’t always agree with. Continue to improve.

·      Be beautiful.

·      I added that bit in myself.

I had Steve Austin for breakfast

Actually, I listen to his breakfast segment. Which is called Mornings.

        Steve Austin: Also known as Gasbag Austin.        
Teachers can be so cruel.

·      The way you pronounce words, your enunciation, is imperative. You’re trying to communicate, so you need to break down barriers between you and your audience. (So don’t actually use words like imperative when talking to the general public: you sound like a prick)

·      It’s easy to assume that what you’re interested in is what the listeners will be interested in: that’s probably not true. Your focus needs to change from yourself to what your audience wants, because it’s not about you, it’s about them (unless you’re doing the graveyard shift on a music station).

·      If you’re fake on radio, people can tell nearly straight away – they’re not distracted by visuals so it’s easier to tell. On a related note, you often need to change your voice when you want to empathise with someone, and your interviewee can (subconsciously) pick up on it.

·      The components of a good radio story: being human, and searching and exploring for the gamut of human experience – don’t just search for facts in a story, go for the human element, look for the emotional responses. Human beings are emotional creatures, and they respond to genuine emotion.

·      For night-time radio you need to talk less and listen more – listen to them and show them respect. The two are related: listening implies respect, and people respond to that courtesy.

·      Truthfulness is radio is very important.

And finally: don’t give up! If you really want it, go after it.

This Day In Pictures (Stephen Fry and Seagulls)

Once again, intrepid reader, I ventured down, down, down the stairs of the colossal sandstone monument to knowledge, into the dank and disused war room.

This is the war room! You can't fight in here!

 Or, as it’s known today, room 109 of the Forgan Smith Building.

But now I must cease my meandering through the corridors of yesteryear, for the lecture in week four was not about text, but about pictures, and how pictures, like text, can tell a story. These picture stories are everywhere and, unlike text, don’t wind on using words with too many syllables. (Not that I’m dissing words in any way whatsoever)

And here's a Picture of Stephen Fry. There doesn't need to be an explanation for Stephen Fry.

But now for a history of picture stories:

• Too-long-to-remember-ago

- Australian Indigenous Cave Stories, Cave Paintings at Lascaux, France

• BC to AD (and everywhen in between)

- Holy Books & Stained Glass

o   Book of Kells, illuminations, church windows, etc

• Newspapers were invented shortly after the first politician was spawned

- Early newspapers/news stories – originally illustrated with line drawings and woodcuts

• 1879

- First published photo in a newspaper (halftone only), rather than the heretofore line drawings, wood cuts and engravings.

• 1936

- The first colour photo is published in the Scottish Daily Record and Mail

•  And then everything else was shopped.

•  And then they stopped using human models and made everything on a computer.

The end.

So what makes a Great Photo?

Clue: It’s not (always) having great equipment.

Hold on guys, because this is where it gets technical. Fortunately, my dad is a professional photographer, so I understood all these fancy terms already.

Check out my new lens kids! It only cost 4 and a half grand, so we only need to skip dinner for 3 weeks!
If you think I'm joking about lens prices, you would be mistaken. My dad has a lens worth 6 grand.
And once I went without dinner for 5 years.

·      Framing – this is basically where you put your subject in the photo

·      Focus – this is about how much of your photo is blurry

·      Angle & Point of View (POV) – this is where you take the picture from (are you shooting from above or below, or to the side?)

·      Exposure/Light – basically, which bits of your picture are dark, and which bits are light, and how light? How dark?

·      Timing/Shutter Speed - Timing is just about getting the best photo possible – which often means waiting till the right time. Shutter speed to me means the difference between a blurry and in-focus short.

·      Capturing the Moment – This comes back to timing – clicking the button at the exact second the person is jumping, or smiling, or crying.

·      Inclusion of Sound Dimension (Movies) – Would a movie/grab be better if it was silent, or if you could hear the screams?

CAW! CAW! That poor kid doesn't stand a chance.
Is anybody else getting flashbacks to The Birds?

“A picture has no meaning at all if it can’t tell a story”

And that picture story was about how terrifying seagulls are.