Teaching Backpack Journalism

We are currently in the interview process as we search for three new faculty members.  One area where we have recognized a need is in multimedia and new media studies.  We have professors who are skilled in writing, photojournalism, video and production and editing.  We have faculty who write scripts and edit films and those who are talented in podcasting.

Courtesy of Google Images

Of course, all our faculty are aware of web development and the use of social media, even if we aren't proficient in all the tools.  But we DO recognize that the world of journalism has changed.  When I was a sports writer, I took a pen and a notepad on assignment.  Occasionally I'd bring along a tape recorder and maybe my camera (if I had time to develop the film before deadline, that is).  

This, however, is the age of backpack journalism.  Where I could write a story and perhaps publish a picture 20-25 years ago, today I could Tweet about my interview with links to a podcast taken off my digital recorder, write the story for the next day's publication, develop a photo slide show, and use my iPad to record a standup with the coach for the advance story on our webpage.  I could even get some b-roll of the game or practice and then edit it into a short-form video using iMovie, again, right off my iPad.  And thanks to Wifi, I could do all this from my corner cafe while sipping a cup of coffee.  Talk about an exciting time to be a journalist! 

Check out this link at wikipedia.  It's a really interesting read!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backpack_journalism 

Is Football King, Or Has The Media Made It So?

Let me begin by saying I love football.  It is the greatest sport under the heavens, the ultimate team sport combining brute strength and intelligence in a battle of wills among combatants.  I began playing in fourth grade at the YMCA in North Little Rock, Ark. and didn’t stop until I graduated from Central Missouri State University.  I love broadcasting games, love writing about the sport, love teaching my sons about the game.  I wish the Arena Football League were on television more so I could watch in the spring.  But even I think ESPN and Sports Illustrated might be going a bit overboard in their coverage. 

It seems every time I turn on ESPN I’m getting reports about the Combine, which free agent is going where, whose coach has just signed an extension.  Yes, that is all newsworthy, but college basketball is heating up as we ready for March Madness! Baseball spring training has begun! Hockey is finally back on ice! The off-season football seems to be getting as much coverage as the IN-season football! 

Sports Illustrated is just as football crazy.  In the March 4 issue, of the 51 pages dedicated to content (meaning those without ads), 21 were dedicated to football.  That’s 41 percent of the magazine!  Baseball got less than half that much coverage in SI’s so called “Spring Training ‘13” issue!  The cover of the March 4 magazine shows South Carolina’s Jadeveon Clowney busting through a montage of basketball players and the header reads “Spring Football ’13 (Sorry, hoops, two more weeks to wait).

True, in America, football is king.  Of Forbes 50 Most Valuable Sports Franchises, 31 are professional football teams.  Acording to http://mostpopularsports.net/in-america, football in America is No. 1, followed by baseball, basketball, hockey and soccer.  The Richest, a website dedicated to pop culture and finance, had the same findings.  So did the online resource page “Buzzle”.  And wikianswers.com noted that, while NASCAR actually has the highest national ratings, football is king among team sports.

This, then, begs the question:  Do media outlets such as ESPN and Sports Illustrated bring us football because it is our favorite sport, or is football our favorite sport because that is what are presented with most often? As a professor of journalism, I am compelled to ask the question.  It’s the classic chicken or the egg argument, but with a pigskin.

In 1972, journalism professors Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw proposed Agenda-Setting Theory.  Their hypothesis, according to “A First Look at Communication Theory”:  The mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their news agenda to the public agenda.  In other words, to quote University of Wisconsin political scientist Bernard Cohen, “The press may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about.”

It would seem, at least when it comes to football, McCombs and Shaw may be right!