I’m a writer. I’ve known that being an author is what I’ve wanted to do since the 8th grade. I just added journalism, just in-case being an author didn’t work out. I always thought that there was going to be a large difference between fiction writing and journalism. Yet, the more I get into this class and participate, the two really aren’t that different at all. One just requires straight fact, while the other is a mix of fact and fiction. After reading this, I realized that the two aren’t that different from another after-all.

The same rules apply to creative writing as it does Journaling. Like: If a scene doesnt need detail, don’t add them. It doesnt matter what color her phone is. Unless something is out of the ordinary, dont bother adding it. I learned that details are important, but if there are too many details it gets too wordy and confusing. A quote from the reading is: “Color is a way of seeing a story. Color shouldn’t make the story, but add to it.” Meaning to me that color adds to the picture, but its alright black and white.

After reading this, I honestly didn’t learn anything new. It only went into depth of what I already knew. It was interesting to read and I’m sure it’ll come in handy someday, but I didn’t learn anything new. It just emphasized that we shouldn’t use many cliches or metaphors in journalism because everything is old and overused. Just as that is not allowed in journalism that isn’t allowed in creative writing either.

ALSO! This made me laugh, pg. 88 it said: “You’d find fewer cliches in his [Red Smith] copy than there are snakes in Ireland.” I’ve been to Ireland and multiple times they told us that there are no snakes in Ireland. There aren’t alot of things in Ireland trying to kill you. You have a better chance of stepping in horse poop or getting hit by a car on the streets of Dublin, then you do getting bitten by a snake. So, just reading that sentence made me laugh because there are supposedly no snakes in Ireland. Meaning if there are fewer cliches in his book then there are snake in Ireland. There will be no cliches in his book.

Article: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-19/news/ct-talk-huppke-obit-facts-20120419_1_facts-philosopher-opinion

If we didn’t have facts to rely on, what would we believe in?

Mary says: “We’ll never agree on anything.”

I think she is right. If facts don’t exist, what kind of world would we be in? Even with existing facts, things don’t exist. Let me explain, if i said the sky was blue and another said it’s ever changing because it’s not just blue. Sometimes its gray, sometimes its blue with white spots, and other times its orange, red, and yellow. The fact is then that the sky is ever changing, but it is also blue.

Anything and everything can exist. So with that being said. Even with facts existing, some people still think their opinion is correct. If we lived in a world with no fact and fact was just opinion. Where people tell me my opinion isn’t right and I argued that there’s isn’t right either. Nothing would be right and everything would be unsolved.

Why is there an article about facts? It is what it is. I understand questioning the world. I do my fair share, but why question what we already know. Turning our thoughts into some fake fact, which is actually a lie. Although it makes sense to us, then it is truth. Facts could be taken as lies and lies could be taken as fact. Facts aren’t dead, they help keep the world somewhat together and sane. Everyone has an opinion and something to believe in. In the end though, something does exists that everyone will see as the same and that is what we can believe in.

Rachel Eisenbraun is from Rapid City, South Dakota and is a Senior here at Morningside College.

She came to Morningside because she was recruited to play soccer. She decided to come to M’Side because it is not South Dakota. While all of her other class mates went to a school in South Dakota, she came to Sioux City. She is a photography and graphic design major here and is unsure with what she wants to do with it. She says that just as long as she can get a job traveling and taking pictures to advertise for a company, she’ll be more then happy.

Rachel loves to travel. She went to Italy her senior year of high school and just last year traveled once again to Europe. This time visiting: England, Ireland, and Wales. Between her classes, picture taking, soccer practices, and everything else this awesome girl does, she loves to read. Rachel likes to read a lot of different things. She is currently reading the Divergent series and is a HUGE Harry Potter nerd.

Article: http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/bias-objectivity/lost-meaning-objectivity/

Journalism isn’t taught, but is learned. What I got from this article is that journalism cannot be taught in class, but rather an experience that is gained from life.

• “Overwhelmingly the answer was: by trial and error and on my own or from a friend. Rarely did journalists report learning them in journalism school or from their editors.”

This part really stuck out to me because that’s kinda with everything. Accidentally added baking soda instead of baking power, its okay. Turned all your white socks pink? Its okay, try again. Its okay to make mistakes. Live and learn and keep on going. Journalism is just like that, your first article isn’t going to be awesome and people will criticize it. Keep on writing. Keep on researching. Keep on going. They will all get better and if you stop writing, you will never know if the writing do get better. Use the criticisms from the old articles to only improve. No one is perfect and things will always get better.

Basically, live and learn. No one will ever receive the experience to be a journalist in a class. The only way to get that experience is to get out there and find things out for themselves. Keep on writing.

Article: http://journalism.about.com/od/ethicsprofessionalism/a/objectivity.htm

Basically, with these steps, I’m learning how to live a drama free life.

Objectivity means that when covering hard news, reporters don’t convey their own feelings, biases or prejudices in their stories.

Fairness means that reporters covering a story must remember there are usually two sides – and often more – to most issues, and that those differing viewpoints should be given roughly equal space in any news story.

Honestly, when I read this I laughed a bit. Not because the article is funny, but of how I am able to relate to it. The rules to being a good journalist are basically the rules, you should follow for a drama free life.

Being a journalist you have to remain neutral and not let people know how you really feel about a subject. While in life, if your friends are in a fight, you have to remain a neutral party not wanting to pick sides. Otherwise the entire thing may blow up and you’ll end up losing a friend in the process. There’s always two sides to a story. One is right in its own way, just as the other. Just as objectivity plays a huge part in journalism and life, so does fairness. As there are two sides to the story, journalist have to share both of the stories without their opinion. So, then it isn’t biast and both stories have time in the spotlight. Relating that to life, friends who want to stay neutral and help out, listen to both sides of the argument. Even though they say they don’t pick a side, they pick a side, people always do. Yet that neutral person, just needs to keep a poker face and not butt in with their opinion so that opposing fires don’t grow. That isn’t always the case where opinions are kept to themselves, but is ideal.

Basically the general rules to being a good journalist are the same rules anyone should follow with life.

Article: http://gigaom.com/2011/09/02/is-journalism-as-we-know-it-becoming-obsolete/

Since non-journalist can do it just as easily as a journalist can, what makes a journalist a journalist? Why are they different? Is there even a difference?

Journalism – Fundamentally about a spirit of inquiry, of curiosity, of wanting to make sense of things.

Everyone gets their news in their own way. The way to get news has changed and it will keep changing. Soon enough, we will stop paying people to get news for us. Then I reread the article and thought, how would people get the source? If we don’t pay people, how are we going to learn something about other things. I mainly thought about celebrities. Weird, paying people to do more research/creep on other people. Just so that fans and other people will know what’s going on in their life. Isn’t sad that we are more interest in the lives of others then our own? Nonetheless, if we didn’t pay people to do what they do, it would one be very VERY illegal. So, if there weren’t journalists who did their research, then the general public would just have to hope that celebrities would like to share their personal life with everyone.

I don’t think journalism is becoming obsolete, but merely adjusting and changing with the times. Nothing is the same as it was ‘back in the day’ everything is different. We aren’t the same as we were years ago, so why should the way we receive our news stay the same. Everything is moving forward and journalism is too. Everyone is a journalist without even realizing it. Saying that I don’t think the people who retweet, repost, or share something they’ve learned is a journalist, but someone who is the first to hear it or see something happen and directly report it. I feel is a journalist, we all have a bit of a journalist inside of us, but then again it could just be natural human nature of wanting others to know. If this were the case all journalists are created by chance. Other then that, I just don’t think journalism is becoming obsolete, but rather adjusting and keeping up with the world.

Welcome to Morningside.edu Blogs. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Your blog is set to “Private” by default and will not be listed on the main page. To change this behavior use your dashboard, “Settings” and look inside “Privacy”.