"Non-Stop News" by Ken Auletta

“Everything is rushed. Anita Dunn says, ‘When journalists call you to discuss a story, it’s not because they’re interested in having a discussion. They’re interested in a response. And the need to file five times a day encourages this.’ Instead of seeking context or disputing a claim, reporters often simply get two opposing quotes and file a he said/she said story.

Anita Dunn said “When journalists call you to discuss a story, it’s not because they’re interested in having a discussion. They’re interested in a response. And the need to file five times a day encourages this.” In saying, Dunn’s point is that journalists seek out each other and use each other not because they personally would like to hear each other’s point of view, but instead they need a response for whatever story they’re covering. The need to file five times a day brings a frantic rush to reporters and journalists alike resulting in news having no depth and the quality of the story suffers. The immediate access to news makes it hard for anyone to keep up with anything, be it journalists or just average people hearing about it. I think its interesting that the point of journalists calling each other is to get a response from one another, rather than having an in depth discussion about the topic. I also like the inference that Ken Auletta makes about the news stories/ journalists’ writing just turning into a “he said/she said” story that has no depth or meaning. Instead of actually putting time and effort into a piece, journalists have to get their writing done, and get it done as soon as humanly possible. This “need for speed” is increasing more and more as news is becoming more accessible to the populous. The immediate access and 24 hour news cycle means news must be updated constantly. For journalists and reporters alike, this non stop pressure leaves no lag time for a journalist who used to be able to take their time and put thought effort into a piece. Journalists used to be able to research and get solid facts before they started writing and published a piece, now they don’t even have time to get any for sure facts or even at least two sides of the story. I think that because of this our news is not always as accurate as we would like to think and we only see one side of an argument. News stories used to be well thought out and could be written with a lot of time put into them, not a quick writing session getting down the not always solid facts and calling a friend for a response.

the now news

non-stop news

The transformation in Media technology has also altered government communication strategy. "The biggest White House press frustration is that nothing can drive a news cycle anymore."

This is on page 43 last paragraph in the first Column. Aurthur Ken Auletta is saying it and he quotes Mark McKinnon.

The transformation they are talking about is how technology is effecting the media today. Technology is speeding up the news proses, now anyone can get any news they want just by checking the computer or the T.V. so the reporters need to keep it all up to date much more and accurate so they don't lose viewers. "Nothing can drive a news cycle anymore." no one can just decide that they want to report on a certain thing at any given time, now they report on the current news the new news.

This reminds me of how younger generations want everything now. If we want to know something we want it now. There are different ways to get information and quick we have this need for instant gratification.

Responce #5

In the article, "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution," the author, Cynthia L. Selfe, an English studies teacher, writes about three forms of advertisements using computers. Selfe gives a description of a popular social narrative-one that people wish was true-and a revision of that same narrative-one that shows the real picture. And through the revised narrative, Selfe opens the eyes of her readers as to how technology is deceiving them. Selfe claims that "an exclusive focus on the positive changes associated with technology, often serves to distract educators from recognizing how existing social forces actually work to resist change in connection with technology." In other words she wants the educators, who are mainly her readers, to realize that though it brings about positive social changes, technology also hides the negative side of things. It has a mask that distracts us and keeps us from seeing the whole picture.
The very first narrative she explains to her readers is one of a 'Global village'-the popular social narrative. And "according to this popular social narrative, the computer network that spans the globe with serve to...bind together the people of the world regardless of race, ethnicity, or location." So computers are used in such a way that they connect all the people in the world. That is just an awesome picture: no more separation based on borders and ethical and racial differences, we would be connected with different cultures, and be able to see how other people live. We would all be living in paradise because those are the things that would cause wars to break out and technology could bring it down, if not stop it. But then we see the revised narrative, the "Electronic Colony", and the true reality of what we do with technology is put to light. "In this story, Americans use technology to become world travelers, to learn about-and acquire knowledge of- other cultures while remaining comfortably situated within their own living rooms and, thus, comfortably separated from the other inhabitants of the global village." We are too lazy, too full of self worth, to actually go out into the world, but instead we sit around and have the computer screen tell us what is going on in the world. We don't use the technology given us to help shape a better world, but take the easy way out instead and experience the world just the way it is from our computers. Selfe even shows the readers a picture of a white woman sitting in her living room that displays artifacts from around the world and a big screen full of "exotic people and far-off locations" and a computer that displays a world map on it's screen. Sure we can see what is going on, but we don't get to live it. We don't get to smell what they smell, live the way they live, eat what they eat, we live in out own little bubble of a world in our own homes.
Now a days, I think that in a way this is still going on, not necessarily with computers as it's focus as to why we don't do what we should do, but there are still commercials on TV's that ask you to support kids from another county by sending a monthly check, they don't ask you to come down and see the child face-to-face, form a relationship with the child, or live the we that they live. Their just asking you to send money not experience what they have been experiencing their whole lives. So I believe that we are starting to form a better connection with other nations, but we haven't come very far. We've gone from sitting in our living rooms, looking at the computer screen, to picking up the phone and sending money, but there is still more we could do. Selfe told her readers "twenty percent of the population currently consumes eighty percent of the resources." So one thing we could do is share those resources help them get better food, warmer clothes, and safer house. These are just a few steps we can take in order to get from the "Electronic Colony" to the "Global Village".

Kylie's Response on "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution"

In our culture today we lean on believing what is shown to us through pictures, adds, and graphics. In the essay “Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution” by Cynthia L. Selfe she discusses the impact technology has on us along with the fears and the essentials of it. Selfe’s first narrative was “The Global Village and the Electronic Colony”. In this popular social narrative she explains how the computer network that spans the globe will serve to erase meaningless geopolitical borders, eliminate racial and ethnic differences, re-establish a historical familial relationship which binds together the peoples of the world regardless of race, ethnicity, or location. We are supplied with information about these topics through news, radio, and internet, but the issue is that it is edited so that the cruel and depressing stuff that is actually happening to others like us is hidden. We know its there, yet we are not obligated to hear or go through the painful obstacles others go through without a choice. The internet have created a separation between Americans and people of other races and locations by creating a defined knowledge. This knowledge is limited. Americans know what is going on, but without having to physically or mentally go through it they have lost remorse and sympathy for those in different situations. We only allow ourselves to know what we are comfortable knowing. Selfe says, “In fact, we find ourselves, as a culture, ill equipped to cope with the changes that the ‘global village’ story necessitates, unable, even, to imagine, collectivity, ways of relating to the world outside our previous historical and cultural experiences.” In this essay she give examples of two pictures. In the first figure it is an ethnic man with the world above him and the text says, “For the world to have a future we must work together as one tribe.” In the second figure it has several pictures of a man and of his tribe the texts for this figure is, “Welcome to the planet. Virgin’s one tribe. Virgin’s one world atlas. Welcome to One Tribe and One World.” With our technology today we rarely can even tell when we are just getting the re-told and revised facts shown to us. She goes on to explain in this essay, “This re-telling and re-vising of the Global Village story- we can now call it the Electronic Colonial narrative- happens very naturally within the discursive venues available to our culture- on television, in our classrooms, in books, and articles, and in corporate settings- often without anyone noticing because the elements of revised Electronic Colonial narrative are so much more familiar and acceptable to us than were those of the original Global Village story.

After reading this essay, I agree with Selfe’s understanding of technology and how it have impacted us without even realizing it. An example of this could be, my friend and I went on the internet and we came across an add for donating to the cause of Africa and Global Hunger. Instead of donating or even giving the add the time of day, they move on to check their Facebook to distract them from the hard truth. Last week I was in a class at my high school and we are picking debate topics and mine is abortion. I was on the internet looking up statistics and information and a page popped up, it was a picture of a baby who had been aborted and it broke my heart. This is a first-hand picture of what is happening in real life, and after seeing that picture it impacted me so much. We are given many opportunities to hear or see the cold facts on which is happening, but it is in our hands to click the button or not change the channel. The revised and blinded version of facts are supplied in many places and in the essay Selfe describes how we use that to claim we can understand and experience what people in other places are going through. Yet, we do not know what they are going through, it is not happening to us, we keep it “arm’s length away” from us so that we do not have to suffer.

Taylor's response to Cynthia Selfe's "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution"

The Internet. One of the only mediums that people of today can instantly connect to people all over the world with one click of a button. With that one click we can talk to people worldwide, explore ancient ruins, travel over the African jungles, along with other endless possibilities. The internet literarily gives us the world at our fingertips. We like to think of the internet as “The Global Village” where everyone all over the world can be connected and come together in one place. Some think that the internet can bring everyone together in a sort of melting pot, where all peoples of the world can coexist despite the barriers of racial and cultural differences and political boarders. Cynthia L. Self, author of “Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution”, thinks otherwise. In “Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution”, Selfe discusses a few of the popular narratives, what people like to think, versus the revised narratives of the popular narratives, the reality rather than fantasy. In Selfe’s book, one of the popular narratives she talks about is the idea of the internet being a “Global Village” that brings everyone together. Selfe then introduces the revised narrative, which is that the internet is an “Electronic Colony” rather than the utopian ideal that is the “Global Village”. Selfe herself writes that “the global village retains its reach, but it becomes a world in which different cultures, different peoples, exist to be discovered, explored, marveled at-in a sense, known and claimed by-those who, can design and use technology. Inhabitants of this electronic global village, in turn, become foreigners, exotics, savages, objects to study and sometimes, to control”. With this quote, Selfe is discussing the fact that many countries, such as the United States, feel superior to other countries and can therefore have the access and privilege to just use them as a sort of entertainment. Selfe also discusses that not all places have the same equal access to technology as others making the ideal of equality and the “global village” near impossible for some to be a part of merely because of inability to access computers because of area or poverty. Because of this, the internet has naturally become an “electronic colony” where more fortunate places and people can, as Selfe puts it, marvel at others who are looked at as “foreigners, exotics, and savages”.

I agree with Selfe’s idea that the internet is an “electronic colony” rather than a “global village.” I feel that although the internet in a sense puts the world at your fingertips, it is a kind of experience that is not as unique and firsthand. Selfe advocates the fact that “Americans use technology to become would travelers, to learn about- and acquire knowledge of- other cultures, while remaining comfortably situated within their own living rooms and thus, comfortably separated from the other inhabitants of the global village”. Selfe’s point is that by seeing the world through a screen on a desk or in your own lap in the comfort of your own home, people cannot thoroughly comprehend what it is they are seeing or reading about. The internet makes us feel included but the reality is that we are really comfortably removed from the situation, overlooking the fact we’re in the comfort of our own homes in our own comfortable living rooms sitting in a warn nice chair. I can agree with Selfe’s claim because my life experiences with the internet confirm the feeling of being a part of something when really I’m simply just watching from a comfortable distance. This “electronic colony” is not a new idea that came with the internet and new technology; it is now just more accessible to the populous. This idea is all around of everywhere, not only the internet, but in the news media on the television and on the radio as well as in books and magazines. Sure I can see poverty on a screen and feel bad and feel this motivation to try to help and make a difference but I’m not there experiencing it right among them. Although I personally in no way feel inferior to other people because of my race or where I live, there is no way I can fathom or feel what they are feeling and they struggles they go through. I’m not living there, I’m not immersed in the poverty itself, I can’t smell the air or feel the hunger or sadness they are feeling. I am just simply sympathizing with them through what I’m seeing through a screen. Though I concede Selfe’s theory on the “Electronic Colony” ruling the internet and media rather than the “Global Village”, I still insist that the internet is a start and step towards the idea of the “Global Village”. Although we are just seeing things through a screen, this could inspire some to do more and actually make a difference.

Reading Response on "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution"

In Cynthia Selfe’s writing, "Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution," she discusses about the fears and facts of technology around the world. She talks on three narratives that America believes when it comes to technology: "The Global Village and The Electronic Colony", "Land of Equal Opportunity and Land of Difference," and "The Un-Gendered Utopia and The Same Old Gendered Stuff.” Selfe explains in the first narrative that Americans have relied on technology doing the work for them; Americans have less effort doing the labor and have turned to technology for faster results. For example, instead of making that trip to the library to research about a subject or matter, we would rather resort to the internet as opposed to reading a lengthy book (more time consuming). Selfe urges, “Americans use technology to become world travelers, to learn about- and acquire knowledge of- other cultures, while remaining comfortably situated within their own living rooms and, thus comfortably separated from the other inhabitants of the global village.” She argues, just because we have watched it on the television, it does not mean we have truly experienced it. Therefore, when the technology does the labor for us (when the internet does the researching for us), granted that the results may come faster but the experience of pursuit is not attained (we have not really immersed ourselves in that book). In the second narrative, Selfe points out that America may indeed be a land of equal opportunity, but it is only the land of opportunity for some people. There are many different ethnicities from other parts of the world seeking permanent residence in America, but only those who can afford spending money on immigration requirements can make it. On Selfe’s third narrative, she talks about how technology was initially designed for men since women’s roles in the 1950s were housewives. But now, women go head to head with men; women are doing the same profession as men do. At the same time, we now have men prefer to be “housewives”. The point is there is no ruling on which profession belongs to what gender; both men and women escape the conventional references placed upon them.

I’d like to focus on her first narrative, “The Global Village and The Electronic Colony”. Technology has truly changed my life; I particularly rely on the internet to do the work for me like researching a subject matter as opposed to stepping out from my house to go to the library. I agree that the internet also has its downfalls seeing that for this case, I actually miss the experience in chasing the answer through reading books. Yet, I still maintain that the Internet comes very handy for me. I can send an email to a relative overseas and they instantly get my message. If I were to compose my message on a paper and actually mail the letter out, delivery would certainly take longer. They would most likely get my letter several days later. It would probably be okay if the message you want to convey is not that crucial, ofcourse it would be a joy to receive a tangible letter where you can see and feel the handwriting of the sender. However, I’m sure many would resort to the Internet when something crucial comes up and message must be sent instantly. Technology has its pros and cons. We can always limit ourselves from going overboard but the choice comes from us whether we want to make a change or just the same- happy the way use it.

Reading Responce #6

In our culture, as Amercians, we tend to believe what we are shown- whether that be adds or photographs. In Cynthia Selfe's essay Lest We Think the Revolution is a Revolution, she discribes three different popular narratives- which are when we create fantasies of how we like to think of technology and all of he positive influences it has given to us. She then explains her revised narratives- what technology is really doing to our society. With her audience mainly being to educators, she states " an exclusive focus on the positive changes associated with technology, often serves to distract educators from recognizing how existing social forces actually work to resist change in connection with technology." She is saying that as educators, all focus on technology has been on positive changes while casually ignoring the social ways in which technology does not support change. In her essay, she compares the popular narrative- what we want to believe, with her revised narrative- what we really believe.
The first narrative, The Global Village deals with the fact that we would like to believe that "technology will help us create a global village in which the peoples of the world are all connected." It is nice thought that we have access to all these people around the world. We don't have to worry about race, what country you are from and all walls are torn down. It is then highly disapointing when she discribes that her revised narrative as "the global village [retaining] its geographical reach, but it becomes a world in which different culture, different peoples, exist to be discovered, expored, marveled at." In a sense of learning and education about other societies other than our own, the internet is a great source. However, in the sense that we are connecting with people from all over the world as if there are no barriers between us, that is highly unrealistic and nieve. We cannot possibly create a "global village" on the internet, it's just not possible. The internet can be very unsafe at times because you don't know who you are really talking to and if they are telling you the truth. So to simply rely on thinking that we as a world is becoming a community due to the internet, its foolish.

As for the next two popular narratives, they explain how in "this landscape, Americans like to believe, [it] is open to everybody- male and female, regardless of clor, class or connection'', while the last popular narrive is focusing mainly on gender biases. The revised narrative is that "Amercia is the land of opportunity only for some people" and that they don't show any kind of minority. I don't think this it true nowadays. I think that today, companies that air ads, are so affraid of being pegged as predidous that they steer clear of most things that are biased and try to put in more minorites while still keeping in mind as to who their audience is. This is a hard task, you aren't going to please everyone. We all need to remember that we are not at the point where everything is perfect, but we are trying and hopefully, we will get there.