Now unless you’ve been hiding under a rock, you’d be aware of the controversy surrounding “Australia’s Next Top Model” season finale that took place on Tuesday the 28th September 2010. For those that haven’t a clue what I’m talking about here’s the low down. Sarah Murdoch the host of the show accidentally announced the wrong name of the winner on live television. A mortified Murdoch who quickly realized the stuff up then had to retract the announcement and re announce the correct winner’s name. She said there was a communication error between her ear piece and the television prompter.
Reports have been mixed on what caused the mishap even suggesting that it was a stunt and that it was Murdoch’s fault that it happened. However according to Honery from the Sydney Morning Herald in his story “Curse returns to top model” (http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/people/curse-returns-to-top-model-20101001-16116.html?from=smh_sb) published on October 2nd 2010, an unnamed producer has stepped up to take the blame for the mix up. Honery’s article tells of the problems the program has had with the past hosts. And how there is a new host nearly every season because something goes wrong.
The article has incorporated the footage from the shows finale in order to give you an idea about the slip up and Murdoch’s reaction when she realizes her mistake. There isn’t any other sources used from people involved in the incident but the clip says a lot on its own. Honery has also used previous comments made from Foxtel boss Brian Walsh about having to get rid of Erika Hynantz one of the shows previous hosts to illustrate what he calls a “curse”. This is probably the only time I’ll say that the clip as the only main source of information is enough to convey the whole story. However this story could have done with a few more credible sources like Murdoch herself or the finalists.
After this experience producers should take note and bring back the good old fashioned envelope with the winners name in it in order to avoid catastrophes. But hey you got to admit it does make for good publicity and television!
Friday, October 1, 2010
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Can you tell me how to get, how to get to Sesame Street...
Ok so my blogs have mostly been about celebrities doing something for a greater good, political purposes or something that is novelty in the entertainment industry like the Mankowitz story a few weeks back. But I thought this was a bit different to my norm.
Now who would have thought Sesame Street would ever make the news..For all the wrong reasons that is? Well it seems that producers of the children’s show have angered parents when guest star Katy Perry popped in to do a segment on the show with Elmo. The problem was that the segment that was released on youtube prior to being screened was deemed by parents as too revealing for the children’s television show. Parents claimed that the singers outfit was too raunchy.
Following the concerns of parents, the shows producers decided to cut the singers appearance on the show and have left the segment for viewing on youtube only.
The article written by Kellet “Sesame Street defends Katy Perry Cleavage cut” (http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/sesame-street-defends-katy-perry-cleavage-cut-20100924-15p92.html), describes what happened and the reaction from producers and Perry.
The writer has used statements from producers of the show that explain the decision to cut the footage of Perry. The article has also used Perry’s twitter comment about the decision. Further to this the article also has used an online opinion poll to give viewers opinions of the incident and has also incorporated the segment video for people to view the content themselves.
The sources used could have also incorporated comments made from parents in order to show the reader what complaints were made by parents, as well as what other people that didn’t support the move to cut the clip said. However, the article is a good example of how to incorporate video and opinion polls with news in order to give readers a much fairer overview of the issue. It helps readers to also form their own opinion of whether there are valid arguments from parents in regards to their concerns about Perry’s segment, whilst also allowing readers to judge if it was an over reaction.
Well in my opinion like most have argued. It was a huge over reaction. I’m sure most children have seen worse. Maybe next time people should look at what they wear around their children before criticizing a person that has built their image through the clothes she wears. I’m sure most parents and their children have either sung along to her songs or bought or downloaded her album!
and heres the link for the clip...check it out!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHROHJlU_Ng
Now who would have thought Sesame Street would ever make the news..For all the wrong reasons that is? Well it seems that producers of the children’s show have angered parents when guest star Katy Perry popped in to do a segment on the show with Elmo. The problem was that the segment that was released on youtube prior to being screened was deemed by parents as too revealing for the children’s television show. Parents claimed that the singers outfit was too raunchy.
Following the concerns of parents, the shows producers decided to cut the singers appearance on the show and have left the segment for viewing on youtube only.
The article written by Kellet “Sesame Street defends Katy Perry Cleavage cut” (http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/sesame-street-defends-katy-perry-cleavage-cut-20100924-15p92.html), describes what happened and the reaction from producers and Perry.
The writer has used statements from producers of the show that explain the decision to cut the footage of Perry. The article has also used Perry’s twitter comment about the decision. Further to this the article also has used an online opinion poll to give viewers opinions of the incident and has also incorporated the segment video for people to view the content themselves.
The sources used could have also incorporated comments made from parents in order to show the reader what complaints were made by parents, as well as what other people that didn’t support the move to cut the clip said. However, the article is a good example of how to incorporate video and opinion polls with news in order to give readers a much fairer overview of the issue. It helps readers to also form their own opinion of whether there are valid arguments from parents in regards to their concerns about Perry’s segment, whilst also allowing readers to judge if it was an over reaction.
Well in my opinion like most have argued. It was a huge over reaction. I’m sure most children have seen worse. Maybe next time people should look at what they wear around their children before criticizing a person that has built their image through the clothes she wears. I’m sure most parents and their children have either sung along to her songs or bought or downloaded her album!
and heres the link for the clip...check it out!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHROHJlU_Ng
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Welcome to the Sydney Oprah House!
The spotlight has shone on Australia this week, with Oprah Winfery set to hit Aussie shores sometime in December for 8 days. The ABC online (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/17/3014313.htm?section=entertainment) has published a story titled “Oprah may crash fan’s place” on the 17th September 2010. The article explains what the talk show queen is going to do and where she is going to go and her plans while she is here. Australia is excited, this is Oprah and she is bigger than the Queen (well at least to me) and there have been hundreds of articles published all around the world about her decision to come down under.
The article tells how Oprah there may be a surprise for one of her Aussie fans, where she may decide to “crash’ a fans place. The story has used quotes from Oprah herself explaining that plans for the show are still under wraps but that she is eagerly awaiting her trip.
The article also suggests or shall I say speculates about what Aussie stars may make an appearance in the two shows that she is to film at the Sydney Opera House, but cannot confirm if they will definitely be on. Just that they are on a list.
It also briefly talks about the fact that tourism Australia has spent $3 million to bring Oprah and her 300 fans and 150 staff to Sydney for their trip. But does not really give tourism Australia’s opinion of the decision. Further to this the writer has stated that tourism Australia have been swamped with offers to host the talk show queen, but there has been no source used to back up these claims. It simply states “Tourism officials have been swamped with offers to host the television star - from rainforest and reef resorts to humble homes in outback towns”. Then it goes on to explain that tourism Australia is working closely with Oprah and her production team on their itinerary.
The article isn’t that well written. It only has quotes from Oprah and could have used other sources to give an overall picture of the impact the decision to bring Oprah to Australia will bring for tourism to the country especially considering it opens with Tourism Australia’s bombardment of offers. The writer could have interviewed a fan to get a reaction about Oprah possibly surprising them with a sleepover.
So whilst the article tells us that Oprah’s on her way it doesn’t exactly give away too much about her plans and about Tourism Australia’s role in her itinerary.
The article tells how Oprah there may be a surprise for one of her Aussie fans, where she may decide to “crash’ a fans place. The story has used quotes from Oprah herself explaining that plans for the show are still under wraps but that she is eagerly awaiting her trip.
The article also suggests or shall I say speculates about what Aussie stars may make an appearance in the two shows that she is to film at the Sydney Opera House, but cannot confirm if they will definitely be on. Just that they are on a list.
It also briefly talks about the fact that tourism Australia has spent $3 million to bring Oprah and her 300 fans and 150 staff to Sydney for their trip. But does not really give tourism Australia’s opinion of the decision. Further to this the writer has stated that tourism Australia have been swamped with offers to host the talk show queen, but there has been no source used to back up these claims. It simply states “Tourism officials have been swamped with offers to host the television star - from rainforest and reef resorts to humble homes in outback towns”. Then it goes on to explain that tourism Australia is working closely with Oprah and her production team on their itinerary.
The article isn’t that well written. It only has quotes from Oprah and could have used other sources to give an overall picture of the impact the decision to bring Oprah to Australia will bring for tourism to the country especially considering it opens with Tourism Australia’s bombardment of offers. The writer could have interviewed a fan to get a reaction about Oprah possibly surprising them with a sleepover.
So whilst the article tells us that Oprah’s on her way it doesn’t exactly give away too much about her plans and about Tourism Australia’s role in her itinerary.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Angelina Jolie's plea for Pakistan
We all love a celebrity that does their bit to help humanity when disaster strikes. And which celebrity does this the best?? Angelina Jolie of course!!! In her position as UN Goodwill Ambassador, Jolie recently visited flood devastated Pakistan. The visit was a plea by the actress/ ambassador for donations to help the 21 million victims of the floods.
Truscotts’ story on ninemsn on the 9th September 2010 (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/entertainment/7958468/jolie-pleas-for-pakistan-flood-victims) centers on the allegations of corruption within the Pakistani government and the mishandling of aid funds, this has resulted in the lack of donations from people because of this image of instability and corruption. Whilst the story is about Jolie’s visit and what she experienced whilst visiting the disaster zone, it also points to the humanitarian efforts by aid organizations to help those victims.
The story works because it has the five news elements of proximity, timeliness,Human interest, conflict, prominence.The proximity because it’s such a large scale geographical event, timeliness is of the event of the floods, mixed with the human interest story of the victims and also with the conflict of corruption. The prominence is given by Jolie’s presence and appeal for donations. And whilst it is an entertainment news story because of its celebrity association it also holds a hard news story as the plight of the people of Pakistan is a strong element throughout the story.
Truscott has used a few sources and not just Jolie as a way to form a picture of the current situation faced by the lack of donations being received. She has used interviews with the UN’s Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs as well as a spokes woman for the office of coordination of Humanitarian Affairs to give an overall image and assurance that the donations being received will not benefit any corruption that may be taking place within the government. Rather the sources used enforce the UN’s statements that the money and aid received will go directly to the victims of the floods. This has made this story work as it reinforces the message that aid organizations and the UN are ensuring that donations go directly to those affected.
Truscotts’ story on ninemsn on the 9th September 2010 (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/entertainment/7958468/jolie-pleas-for-pakistan-flood-victims) centers on the allegations of corruption within the Pakistani government and the mishandling of aid funds, this has resulted in the lack of donations from people because of this image of instability and corruption. Whilst the story is about Jolie’s visit and what she experienced whilst visiting the disaster zone, it also points to the humanitarian efforts by aid organizations to help those victims.
The story works because it has the five news elements of proximity, timeliness,Human interest, conflict, prominence.The proximity because it’s such a large scale geographical event, timeliness is of the event of the floods, mixed with the human interest story of the victims and also with the conflict of corruption. The prominence is given by Jolie’s presence and appeal for donations. And whilst it is an entertainment news story because of its celebrity association it also holds a hard news story as the plight of the people of Pakistan is a strong element throughout the story.
Truscott has used a few sources and not just Jolie as a way to form a picture of the current situation faced by the lack of donations being received. She has used interviews with the UN’s Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs as well as a spokes woman for the office of coordination of Humanitarian Affairs to give an overall image and assurance that the donations being received will not benefit any corruption that may be taking place within the government. Rather the sources used enforce the UN’s statements that the money and aid received will go directly to the victims of the floods. This has made this story work as it reinforces the message that aid organizations and the UN are ensuring that donations go directly to those affected.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
50 Cent's twitter blunder
We all know rappers can be foul mouthed and arrogant. It’s the persona that their trying to sell. They sing it in their lyrics and show it in their interviews. It seems that now there even taking it to cyber space. Rapper 50 cent has finally put his foot in his mouth, by tweeting about an airline hostess who was trying to do her job. The rapper put a tweet up saying “I'm on a plane [with] this ugly ass stewardess in my face. She keep [sic] asking me if I want shit. I keep telling her no”. This was later followed by an unauthorized photo of the woman.
There was a backlash by many of his followers telling the rapper that his actions were despicable. The rapper had also been previously banned from posting pictures up on twitter because he had previously posted what were deemed to be obscene photographs.
The story published on nine.msn titled “Backlash over 50 Cents Twitter comments” (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=7954543) on the 1 September reveals what the rapper tweeted about the hostess and a few other tweets that have shown his misuse of the site. The story also includes a few of the responses tweeted back to him from some of his followers (presumably not following him anymore). The story is based on tweets by both the rapper and his followers and has no comments and sources from his management or himself. However I found that whilst not using the conventional methods of reporting such as interviews or comments made by the parties involved, just reporting on the tweets themselves was effective in forming a picture of the situation and the response to the rappers behavior from fans. This story is an excellent example of how a story can be told based solely on information or comments made on social networking sites such as twitter, where comments made can piece together a situation or incident and shows the publics response to the misbehavior of public figures.
There was a backlash by many of his followers telling the rapper that his actions were despicable. The rapper had also been previously banned from posting pictures up on twitter because he had previously posted what were deemed to be obscene photographs.
The story published on nine.msn titled “Backlash over 50 Cents Twitter comments” (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=7954543) on the 1 September reveals what the rapper tweeted about the hostess and a few other tweets that have shown his misuse of the site. The story also includes a few of the responses tweeted back to him from some of his followers (presumably not following him anymore). The story is based on tweets by both the rapper and his followers and has no comments and sources from his management or himself. However I found that whilst not using the conventional methods of reporting such as interviews or comments made by the parties involved, just reporting on the tweets themselves was effective in forming a picture of the situation and the response to the rappers behavior from fans. This story is an excellent example of how a story can be told based solely on information or comments made on social networking sites such as twitter, where comments made can piece together a situation or incident and shows the publics response to the misbehavior of public figures.
Friday, August 27, 2010
Art immitates life- Mankowitz and the MI5
Just like the story line out of a spy movie this story reads like one of those classic scripts. The story written by Cordon on ninemsn.com.au on the 26th August 2010 (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=7951327) is about the writer Wolf Mankowitz of James Bond fame. Mankowitz wrote the screenplay for the first Bond movie and helping bring James Bond to the big screen. Similarly the story was also covered by Malvern for The Australian on the same day. (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/james-bond-movie-screenplay-writer-suspected-of-spying-for-soviets/story-e6frg6so-1225910530269).
The story is about secret files that have been made public that the MI5 had on the writer. It was alleged that Mankowitz and his wife- who was a member of the British Communist party during the 1940’s, were under cover secret agents for the Russians. Due to a letter that was intercepted by the MI5, the couple was under surveillance for over a decade 1944-58. The story then goes on to describe how the Mankowitz joined the army, then left and tried to get a job in the Government Central Office of Information. It also states that the MI5’s suspicion of him was later dropped after he cancelled a return trip to the World Youth Fair in Moscow.
Both the stories are written well explaining why the couple was under investigation and rely mainly on the files that were found for their source of information. However both Cordon and Malvern could have sought further comment on the files from Mankowitz’z family or other sources that knew him. It is a soft news story that has news values of oddity and controversy, that presents itself as an interesting entertainment story. The Story reported in The Australian, however goes into more detail about why the suspicions against Mankowitz were dropped.
The oddity of the story is that the writer for the screenplay of the famous secret agent 007 working for MI5 was linked by MI5 to being a secret agent for the Russians himself. The controversy of the story is that again, like the oddity it has, this was during a period in history that saw anyone with an affiliation to socialist sentiments or origins was under suspicion.
The articles are good because they reflect the sentiments and suspicions of intelligence agencies during the period after the Second World War. They illustrate how little things that Mankowitz did seemed to be suspicious to Britain’s intelligence agency. The story is also a good example of how art imitates life.
The story is about secret files that have been made public that the MI5 had on the writer. It was alleged that Mankowitz and his wife- who was a member of the British Communist party during the 1940’s, were under cover secret agents for the Russians. Due to a letter that was intercepted by the MI5, the couple was under surveillance for over a decade 1944-58. The story then goes on to describe how the Mankowitz joined the army, then left and tried to get a job in the Government Central Office of Information. It also states that the MI5’s suspicion of him was later dropped after he cancelled a return trip to the World Youth Fair in Moscow.
Both the stories are written well explaining why the couple was under investigation and rely mainly on the files that were found for their source of information. However both Cordon and Malvern could have sought further comment on the files from Mankowitz’z family or other sources that knew him. It is a soft news story that has news values of oddity and controversy, that presents itself as an interesting entertainment story. The Story reported in The Australian, however goes into more detail about why the suspicions against Mankowitz were dropped.
The oddity of the story is that the writer for the screenplay of the famous secret agent 007 working for MI5 was linked by MI5 to being a secret agent for the Russians himself. The controversy of the story is that again, like the oddity it has, this was during a period in history that saw anyone with an affiliation to socialist sentiments or origins was under suspicion.
The articles are good because they reflect the sentiments and suspicions of intelligence agencies during the period after the Second World War. They illustrate how little things that Mankowitz did seemed to be suspicious to Britain’s intelligence agency. The story is also a good example of how art imitates life.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Wyclef Jean's campaign ends.
This story in the world of entertainment is a follow up to Wyclef Jeans’s campaign to become Haiti’s president.
There are two stories that I found interesting on the topic. The first story was written for the Observer on the 22nd of august 2010 by Harris. The story gave a run down of the fact that Jean had been pulled out of the race for presidency. It also said that there were unclear reasons for why this had happened. But stated that Jean thought it was because he was not a resident of Haiti. It states that there were concerns of death threats and security concerns. The article has used Wyclef jean as a source of information, but has not covered any comments on how Haitians have felt or by any other source and has made the singer/songwriter look as though he had no real political campaign.The article also suggests that there were concerns about riots due to the decision but there is no source to backup that concern.
On the other hand the story written by Damien Cave for the New York Times, has given the clear explanation of why Jean has been declined the chance to run for presidency. The story which was written on the 21st August 2010 clearly identifies that the reason behind the decision that prevented him from running was that he had to have lived in Haiti for five consecutive years prior to the November 28 2010 election.
Cave has also included comment from local business people about their thoughts and has also given an insight to how the supporters of Jean have responded to the news. There is more of an overall picture that this story presents on the outcome of the decision not to allow him to run. Again as with Harris’s story there were mentions of supposed unrest of Jeans supporters but, again, there was no source to back up the statement.
So both stories lacked the information needed to explain statements of supporter unrest yet Cave’s story gave more of an overall picture on how Jean dealt with the news and how ordinary Haitians felt about the country’s elections officials and their decision to end his campaign.
Harris : http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/22/wyclef-jean-haiti-presidential-election
Cave: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/world/americas/22haiti.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
There are two stories that I found interesting on the topic. The first story was written for the Observer on the 22nd of august 2010 by Harris. The story gave a run down of the fact that Jean had been pulled out of the race for presidency. It also said that there were unclear reasons for why this had happened. But stated that Jean thought it was because he was not a resident of Haiti. It states that there were concerns of death threats and security concerns. The article has used Wyclef jean as a source of information, but has not covered any comments on how Haitians have felt or by any other source and has made the singer/songwriter look as though he had no real political campaign.The article also suggests that there were concerns about riots due to the decision but there is no source to backup that concern.
On the other hand the story written by Damien Cave for the New York Times, has given the clear explanation of why Jean has been declined the chance to run for presidency. The story which was written on the 21st August 2010 clearly identifies that the reason behind the decision that prevented him from running was that he had to have lived in Haiti for five consecutive years prior to the November 28 2010 election.
Cave has also included comment from local business people about their thoughts and has also given an insight to how the supporters of Jean have responded to the news. There is more of an overall picture that this story presents on the outcome of the decision not to allow him to run. Again as with Harris’s story there were mentions of supposed unrest of Jeans supporters but, again, there was no source to back up the statement.
So both stories lacked the information needed to explain statements of supporter unrest yet Cave’s story gave more of an overall picture on how Jean dealt with the news and how ordinary Haitians felt about the country’s elections officials and their decision to end his campaign.
Harris : http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/22/wyclef-jean-haiti-presidential-election
Cave: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/world/americas/22haiti.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)