Should I be Silenced

    The first amendment of the Constitution reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."This amendment has been the backbone of American society, and you can see that with the people today. If you ask anyone to name the first 10 amendments, people will consistently get the first and second's right. This is because the first amendment has a significant impact on our lives, and someone who learned about this impact was Edward Murrow and the people affected by the Red Scare. Edward Murrow was a broadcast journalist for CBS; he was most known for his coverage of World War ll, and his show See It Now. This show gained prominence during the red scare years when Murrow and his team consistently call out McCarthy for his blatant violation of civil liberties. This moment in time was so monumental that they made a movie about it in 2005 called Good Night and Good Luck. I will walk you through this movie and show ho
w McCarthy and the government tried to shut up people like Murrow. Around 5 minutes into the film Murrow and his team are sitting in a room trying to figure out a story for the week. During the meeting, they discussed Milo Radulovich, now Milo was a lieutenant in the Air Force, and it came out that Milo's father and sister were suspected communists. During this time, if anyone you were affiliated with was a suspected communist, you were also thought to be one. Since the Air Force did not want to employ a communist, they cut his commission and discharged him from the military Milo had no fair trial. The Air Force constantly talked about a manilla folder that held all of the evidence against Milo.

    Still, no one was permitted to see the contents, not even the board members reducing over his trial. Once Murrow heard this story, he decided to run with it. At this point in time, Murrow was already firmly against the Red Scare and McCarathy this strong opposition led to many people thinking he was a communist himself. While Murrow and his team were working on the Milo story, the Air Force strong-armed and even threatened the studio to not run the story. This moment is huge because it is the film's first sign of government intervention. Also, it makes you think how many reporters have our military threatened or even physically harmed into not running a story. Our military is supposed to be protecting us from the supposed bad guys, not threatening us for exposing their faults. Moving on, Murrow decided to air the story, which was met with a positive reception from the public. Throughout the movie, McCarthy makes many moves to discredit Murrow's reputation. We see this early on when Joseph Wershba was working in DC. One of McCarthy's "employees" hands him an envelope containing evidence that Murrow used to interact with the Soviets. He used to be on their payroll. The absurd thing about all of this was people were being persecuted for an ideology; anyone that challenged McCarthy or slightly questioned him was seen as unpatriotic and communist. Murrow would eventually invite McCarthy onto the show to explain his side of the story. Still, instead of explaining his rationale, he attacks Murrow and accuses him of being a communist again. Throughout the whole film, McCarthy is seen as the big bad villain. In my opinion, however, McCarthy is another victim of the US government too. While McCarthy did jail countless people, he could not have done it on his own McCarthy did not have the power to hand out sentences; he did not appoint himself to committee positions; it is not talked about enough how much the US government really trusted this man. They gave him so much power, and as soon as they realized their mistake, they blamed him and ruined his reputation. John McCarthy, in all essence of the words, was an ignorant and egotistical man, and without the help of the US government, that is all he would ever amount to but as soon as you give a man like him some power, they will run with it. Just keep in mind people will more often try to treat the illness instead of figuring out what is causing the illness.

Considering the Bigger Picture

    Throughout the history of the United States, there have been various instances where the government has attempted to restrict free speech, a fundamental right of every citizen. Some of the most notable examples include Lincoln's arrest of journalists who spoke out against him or the Union during the Civil War and the passing of the Sedition Acts, which made it illegal to criticize the government. These events demonstrate that the government has always sought to control the narrative and limit dissenting voices, especially during times of war.

    Also, as seen in the movie, the concept of being "American" is constantly evolving, and its meaning changes based on the political and social climate of the time. During the Red Scare, individuals who supported communism or did not embrace democracy were considered un-American. In the 1800s, those who opposed slavery were not regarded as true Americans by many Southerners. Even in recent years, individuals who did not support the invasion of Iraq were deemed unpatriotic and disloyal. Such instances reveal the ever-changing nature of the term "American" and how it can exclude and marginalize those who do not conform to the majority's views.

    In recent years, there has been a growing concern about the government's attempts to control the media and limit the public's access to information. During Trump's presidency, he frequently attacked the press, going over 300 days without holding a formal press conference. By banning news outlets like CNN and the Guardian from his briefings, Trump created a chilling effect that prevented alternative viewpoints from being heard. The Obama administration also censored the media including many whistleblowers, with the most prominent one being Edward Snowden, were prosecuted. These attempts to control the narrative are dangerous as they undermine democracy and freedom of speech.

    I've also noticed a modern media trend for this era, and it deserves a name: the Partisan era. Nowadays, every article you read has a clear agenda to push. With the advent of the internet, it's become even more accessible for anyone with extreme views to create a website and publish whatever they consider "newsworthy." It's become increasingly more work to find unbiased reporting these days. Gone are the days when news organizations were known for their credibility and commitment to unbiased truth. Today, all that matters to these companies are generating clicks, and there's nothing like controversy to make you famous

I    n conclusion, it's important to note that not everything the government does is evil. To be fair, the government does much good for the general public. However, it's crucial to open your eyes and not let the good blind you to the bad. Sadly, many atrocities on our civil liberties are being done in broad daylight, and we're not vigilant enough to see it. As the great Edward Murrow said, "Good night and good luck."

Anomymous Sources Reax

If someone were to tell you top state secrets and you asked who told you this and their response was "I cannot say," how likely would you be to believe them? This simple interaction is the main boiling point of anonymous sources. When I listened to the presentation about anonymous sources, I was interested in how controversial this topic is. I always felt that anonymous sources were necessary to protect the leaker, but as the presentation went on, I began to understand the other side more and more.

    First, I firmly believe that people who leak sensitive state documents are criminals, regardless of whether it helps protect the public. However, whether they should be seen as criminals is a question for another day. If someone leaks information and asks to remain anonymous, their names should be published. What they did was illegal, and there are consequences for their actions. However, there is another side to anonymous sources. It could be an employee who overheard a conversation with the CEO. People in these types of situations deserve to be kept anonymous. They have done nothing illegal to obtain the information they know, and if their names were to be leaked, they would likely find it very difficult to find work again.

    With all this in mind, reporters should have anonymous source privileges. As of right now, there are no federally recognized privileges that allow a reporter to keep an anonymous source. While the First Amendment protects reporters extensively in this area, having some law for reassurance would still be good. The main reason I say this is because in the presentation, the group mentioned the story of Judith Miller, and what happened to her should be illegal. She was held in jail for 85 days for not revealing who her anonymous source was, and the only reason she was freed was that her anonymous source said it was okay for her to reveal their meetings.

    With the advent of technology and modern media, anonymous sources will probably become more and more prevalent in our society; this rise in anonymity can be a danger to the credibility of journalists everywhere, or it can help produce breaking news at record numbers, but as of right now we are at a dangerous middle ground and only time can tell.

Bernard Shaw

    Let me tell you about a remarkable journalist who covered the Persian Gulf War from a hotel in Iraq, moderated the first African American presidential debate, and was inducted into the Broadcasting & Cable Hall of Fame. Do you know who I'm referring to? If not, just look at the title - his name is Bernard Shaw.

  Before pursuing his illustrious broadcasting career, Bernard Shaw was born in Chicago on May 22, 1940. His parents were Edgar Shaw, a railroad employee, and Camila Shaw, a housekeeper. Shaw attended Dunbar Vocational High School, where he became interested in journalism. While Shaw was in high school, he began to read many of the local papers, and he was an avid watcher of Edward Murrow's news broadcast, See It Now. He cited Murrow as a massive influence in his life; all of these influences led to Shaw working on his high school paper, and by his senior year, he was the chief editor. In 1958, after finishing high school, Shaw decided to pursue a career in the military and joined the United States Marine Corps the following year. While stationed in Hawaii in 1961, he came across a newspaper article mentioning Walter Cronkite's presence on the island. This piqued his interest, and he called the hotel where Cronkite was staying 34 times to find out his room number. Cronkite eventually answered the next day, and they spoke on the phone before meeting at the hotel. During their meeting, Shaw expressed his desire to become a journalist and work for CBS alongside Cronkite. Shaw served diligently in the Marines until 1963, achieving the rank of Corporal E-4 and working as the Message Center specialist at the Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point base in North Carolina.

   

After leaving the Marines, Shaw enrolled at the University of Illinois in 1964, where he studied history. He would often clip newspaper articles and make frequent trips to DC. In the same year, Shaw started his broadcasting career as an anchor and reporter for WNUS in Chicago. However, his time at WNUS was brief, as he left the company after only two years to work for the Westinghouse Broadcasting Company, also based in Chicago. Shaw graduated from college in 1968 and immediately moved to DC to become the White House correspondent for Westinghouse. From 1971 to 1977, he worked as a Washington correspondent for CBS News before moving to ABC News in 1977. Shaw began his time at ABC News as a Latin America correspondent before being promoted to Capitol Hill Senior Correspondent. In 1980, Shaw departed from ABC to co-anchor Prime News at CNN, where he was among the network's first hires and served as its chief anchor. However, it was on March 30, 1981, that Shaw and CNN made history. After concluding his coverage of President Reagan's speech at the Washington Hilton Hotel, Shaw was preparing to hand over to Atlanta when a report came in that shots had been fired near the hotel. Without any confirmation of an assassination attempt on the President, Shaw maintained a calm and composed demeanor, providing only the facts of the situation to viewers. CNN was able to report on the attack four minutes before any other major news network, catapulting the network to the forefront of breaking news coverage.

In 1988, Shaw was selected to moderate the second US presidential debate between Michael Dukakis and George H.W. Bush, making him the first-ever African-American presidential debate moderator. However, the debate was marred by controversy over one of Shaw's questions. Going into the debate, Bush held a marginal lead in the polls, but many believed that Dukakis could overtake him with a strong performance. Shaw's opening question to Dukakis was loaded: "Governor, if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?" This was a sensitive issue for Dukakis because he was known for his opposition to the death penalty. Dukakis' response to the question was seen as emotionless and clinical, as he focused on the policy implications of the death penalty instead of addressing the emotional impact of such a tragedy. This response contributed to the perception that Dukakis was cold and unfeeling, which hurt his campaign and ultimately led to his defeat.

Shaw was also a remarkable war reporter, best known for his coverage of the 1991 Gulf War. Alongside two other CNN correspondents, Shaw reported on the war from a hotel in Baghdad, even having to take cover under a desk as cruise missiles flew overhead. His reporting was so impressive that then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney praised CNN, saying it had the best reporting he had seen from Baghdad. Shaw's involvement in significant events didn't stop there, though. He covered the Tiananmen Square Incident in 1989, the California Earthquake of 1994, the death and funeral of Princess Diana in 1997, and even moderated the 2000 vice presidential debate.

    Shaw would eventually decide to retire from CNN in March 2001. Even though he occasionally appeared on CNN when significant news happened, such as when a plane flew into White House air space in 2005, Shaw preferred to stay out of the public eye. He had a wife and two kids and cherished spending time with them. In a 2014 interview, Shaw revealed that while he enjoyed all the success, he believed it wasn't worth all the life experiences he missed out on with his loved ones. He even said he would trade all of his success back for that time. Unfortunately, Shaw passed away on September 27, 2022, due to pneumonia. He was 82 years old.

Gotcha Journalism

Gotcha journalism, the practice of entrapping interviewees in the act of doing something scandalous or immoral, has completely taken over the media landscape in today’s world.  One example is the previous Toronto mayor Rob Ford, who was a victim in 2013 when a video of him smoking crack/cocaine was making its rounds. The video was obtained by journalists that have been stalking him for months. While using this method can result in potentially substantial money-making stories and eye-catching headlines, it also significantly impacts the individual being ridiculed. This raises the question of the ethics regarding this method and the need for fairness and privacy laws to be enacted.

Gotcha Journalism has become increasingly popular because the journalism industry is constantly pressured to produce compelling narratives and groundbreaking news. But, it is essential to remember that, particularly in iffy areas like politics, this method can be unjust and manipulative, producing a false idea that distorts the truth. Gotcha Journalism may also be very invasive since it breaches people’s right to privacy, tremendously harming subjects and their families.

Some may argue that gotcha journalism is crucial in holding celebrities accountable despite these criticisms. Journalists can promote a more open and trusting environment by calling out hypocrisy and corruption. But, the only way to properly use gotcha journalism morally, journalists must find a better approach. It’s critical to realize that this method permanently affects those caught in the moment. Targets may lose employment and face societal ambushes through harassment.

Social media has made it easier than ever to catch somebody doing anything that may be controversial because of how quickly and simply sharing films, images, and other content is. As a result, there has been an upsurge in gotcha journalism techniques. Individual news reporters and organizations will go to great lengths to draw attention to or expose wrongdoing through their found material. However, this has aided in the birth and spread of cancel culture, condemning and boycotting people or organizations thought to have acted in ways that don’t reach society’s moral standards. In some instances, cancel culture can be an effective tool to hold people accountable. But, there are also scenarios where it can be unfair, with individuals suffering serious repercussions for actions th
at may have been misinterpreted, taken out of context, or even falsified. 

Focusing on investigative journalism based on reliable evidence and ethical reporting techniques is one possible solution to this problem. This involves carrying out in-depth investigations, confirming sources, and, most importantly, properly allowing their targets a chance to refute the claims. Avoiding the theatrics and click-bait instead of intelligent, nuanced reporting is another significant part of this process. As an alternative, journalists should take the time to understand the boundaries of gotcha journalism and only use it sparingly in specific cases in a “Robinhood” sort of way. They should also examine other strategies that are less intrusive and life-ruining.

Gotcha journalism is unethical, invasive, harmful, and a potent tool for holding people accountable. As journalists, it is our responsibility to strike a balance between transparency, confidentiality, and neutrality. If completed, we may contribute to developing a modern, trustworthy, and proudly ethical media landscape. We should strive to become better journalists.

Nellie Bly React

 

    Nellie Bly was among the most exciting people I learned from the EOTO. Her real name is not actually Nellie Bly; she was born Elizabeth Jane Cochrane, and Nellie Bly was just a pen name she used that was inspired by a Stephen Foster song.  The most interesting thing I learned about her was her covering of the Blackwell Asylum. There were reports of brutality at the asylum, but no one had investigated yet. So this is where Nellie Bly steps in; she decided to feign insanity at a women's boardinghouse, and while she was there, the boarders thought she was crazy, so they contacted the police and got her admitted to the Blackwell Asylum. Once in the asylum, she started to write about the conditions that many of the women there went through. Some of the things she wrote about were alarming, like the nurses beating the patients, food consisting of spoiled beef,  frigid bath water, rats all around, and patients being tied together. She also discovered that some of the patients there were just as sane as she was and were wrongly placed in the asylum. After Bly was released from the asylum, she wrote a series of articles that would eventually be turned into a book called Ten Days in a Mad House. This book had critical acclaim and helped change many fundamentals of the US asylum network.  Also, after the articles were published, many people wondered how Bly could be diagnosed as mentally ill so quickly. After that, the US ensured that future examinations were more in-depth and only the actual mentally ill were allowed into asylums. What also caught my eye was when she traveled the world for around 72 days; while she only held the record for a few months, it is still very impressive that she could do this in a hot air balloon. She was also much more than a journalist; she patented many inventions, with her most impactful being the 55-gallon oil drum still in use today. There are so much more barriers that this remarkable human being has accomplished. I encourage you to read the longer blog post I have linked about her above if you want to know more.
 

History of Black Newspapers

     The first newspaper to be published in America was Publick Occurrences, Both Foreign and Domestick; it was published by Benjamin Harris in 1690; this paper only ran for one issue since in this paper, he critiqued the colonial governor, and there was no constitution or freedom of the press at the time so the governor closed down the paper only days after it was published. Following the closure of the newspaper, no other paper appeared in the colonies until 14 years later when The Boston News-Letter opened up in 1704; this paper actually stayed afloat, and it became a catalyst for the future papers to follow after that influential newspapers like the Boston Gazette, the New York Gazette, and the New-England Courant by the time the revolutionary war started there were already 37 different newspapers being published. You might be wondering why any of this is relevant to the history of Black Newspapers. I am trying to show you how long white people, primarily white men, have controlled the media market. Even before America was a nation, the only newspapers you read would be edited and published by a white man. This is huge because if one race or even demographic is allowed to have a monopoly on the media, then whatever you read will be from the lens of a white man; no matter how impartial one could like to be at that time, their bias would most likely show.

    Black viewpoints in the media were absolutely needed back then. Until the 19th century, black people were constantly vilified in the media. They were only shown in newspapers if they committed a crime or a considerable controversy surrounding their name; they would never be portrayed as people or law-abiding citizens. As mentioned, the first continually published newspaper in America happened in 1704; the first-ever black newspaper was not published until 1827, and it was called Freedom's Journal. Freedom's Journal was started by John Wilk and other free black men. Freedom's Journal was a weekly newspaper that, in complete honesty, did not
 do much different than other newspapers of that era. The significant difference between this newspaper and others is that it treated African Americans as people; they regularly posted local birthdays and praised certain people for their help in the community. Sadly however, this paper did not last very long; their primary audience was African American people; the problem with this is the majority of African Americans at this time were enslaved, and even the ones that were free could barely read or write. Then the ones that could read probably did not make enough money to afford a weekly newspaper. In the end, a tiny portion of the population even wanted to read Freedom's Journal, so the newspaper closed its doors in 1829 only a couple days after celebrating being open for 2 years.

    After the closure of Freedom's Journal, the market for black newspapers expanded but not at the rate that one would expect. When Freedom's Journal closed its doors in 1829, only 25 black newspapers opened up between then and the start of the Civil War, which occurred in 1861. The most prominent of these 25 newspapers was Frederick Douglass' North Star; this was an immensely influential newspaper for its time, and I recommend that you read the North Star blog I posted because I go more in-depth about it there. The main reason for this lack of interest was why Freedom's Journal could not stay afloat; there was no audience. African Americans still were enslaved and had no rights; many could not read, so the people the newspaper was made for could care less for it. All of this changed, however, with the Civil War. When the Union eventually won in 1865, they passed in December of that same year the 13th amendment, which banned the practice of slavery in the United States, except as a punishment for a crime. After the passing of this act, many African Americans wanted to communicate with each other and build a community. With this in mind, many of them learned how to read and write, leading to the Black Newspaper industry explosion.

    Reconstruction was perfect for the black newspapers and the black community overall. The federal government helped protect many black publications and helped enforce some laws that allowed black people to integrate into society easier. However, once Reconstruction ended, the protection that the federal government gave them also went away; this led to a massive rise of white supremacy and effectively led to many of the black publications being made in the north for many years.

One of the most influential black newspapers ever was made in Chicago in 1905. The name of this newspaper was called The Chicago Defender; it was written by Robert S. Abbott. Abbott originally wanted to be a lawyer, but after graduating from law school, no firms wanted to hire a black lawyer. He started The Chicago Defender with a 25-cent investment in his boardinghouse. He used The Chicago Defender to help highlight the injustices that African Americans were facing, and he used the newspaper as a parody of what life was like. This newspaper was also one of the first to cover the lynchings occurring across the United States; it also described the lynchings with gory details and provided pictures of the event so all of America could see the inhumane activities that many African Americans were subjected to. He also helped facilitate the Great Migration, when many African Americans from the south traveled north to help find more economic success and face fewer racial hardships. To help the Great Migration, Abbot would write about the many advantages of living in the north but mostly Chicago. He would also post times trains leave for Chicago and jobs available in Chicago.  The success of this paper helped Abbott become the first African American newspaper millionaire, and The Chicago Defender was the most prominent black newspaper for years until The Pittsburgh Courier eventually took its spot.

    Now The Pittsburgh Courier was founded in 1907 by a former Heinz company guard, Edwin Nathaniel Harleston. Unlike The Chicago Defender, this paper was unsuccessful because of its founder; it became successful because of Robert Lee Vann. Vann, just like Abbott, was also a lawyer and used his law training to help get the Courier formally incorporated in 1910. Also, in that same year, Harleston actually left the paper, and that, led to Vann becoming the editor. The Courier vastly differed from other black newspapers because they covered many viewpoints, not just the African American side. This led to them having around 15 columnists at its height.  The newspaper-crowing achievement, however, came in 1942 when they made the Double V Campaign. In 1942 the Courier was already the largest weekly black newspaper, an achievement they earned in 1938. So at this time, the USA had freshly entered the war, and a litany

of newspapers were commenting on whether it was a good idea. Most white newspapers were entirely into the war. They had been encouraging people to sign up since the attacks of Pearl Harbor, while many African American publications were not against the war. Still, they were against African American men signing up for the war since they felt they should not fight for a country that did not care for them. The Philadelphia Courier was one of the few African American publications that actually wanted people to enlist, so they invited the Double V campaign, which meant victory overseas and victory at home, which mean to conquer racism at home since they thought if they proved their "worth" during the war people would have no choice but to respect them. This was a very successful campaign for the newspaper, with songs, hairstyles, and even handshakes coming out to help further push the Double V agenda.  Sadly, however, the Double V Campaign did not work how they wanted it to; when many African American men returned home from war, they were rarely thanked for their service and were just subjected to the same racial prejudice they had experienced before the war.

    Black newspapers were thriving for much of the 1900s, with many more newspapers being released, like the Atlanta Daily World, the first daily African American newspaper, The Afro-American, The Amsterdam News, The Journal and Guide, and The California Eagle.  It was not until the 1960s that Black newspapers started seeing a decline; ironically enough, their decline directly correlated with the rise of the Civil Rights Movement. This is because there were riots every other week during the Civil Rights movement, and many white reporters were afraid to go to them for cover for fear of being attacked. So many white newspapers started hiring more black journalists to cover the movement and get pictures of the riots. African Americans could also know "see" people like themselves in the newspapers. Also, during these times, many African American newspapers started getting more ads from prominent companies, but with these ads came limitations with what they could publish. With those limitations, many people in the African American community started seeing some of these publications as sellouts; many went out of business in the 60s and the consecutive decades. While African American newspapers are less prominent than they were over 100 years ago, minority voices are still needed. Everyone needs an outlet for their voice, and all perspectives on a topic should be valued regardless of the platform's size.

 

The North Star

 Over the years, people have used the power of the press to expose and shed light on the horrors happening to the people of America. One of the significant issues that newspapers covered during the time was the issue of slavery. The point of slavery sparked the abolition movement, and with that came many abolitionist newspapers like The Liberator, The Emancipator, and Alton's Observer. While these newspapers just listed were very influential and essential for their time, none were written by black men or women; all three were written by northern white men who were sympathetic to the plight of slavery. The lack of black voices and stories in the abolitionist movement was very few, mainly because many African American people at that time could barely read or write. Hence, they had difficulty articulating their words for a large crowd to understand. This gaping hole was helped filled by Frederick Douglass and his newspaper, The North Starr.

While the North Star was a critical and influential newspaper of its time, we must first go through Fedrick Douglass' history before discussing it. Douglass was born a slave in Talbot County, Maryland; while his birth is unknown, many historians think it was either 1817 or 1818. Douglass escaped slavery in 1838 by boarding a train, eventually leading him to New York. While in New York, Douglass learned how to read and write, and with these abilities, he became a well-known abolitionist and p
teacher, he would also go on to publish The North Star newspaper.

    The North Star was founded in Rochester, New York, on December 3, 1847. Douglass took significant inspiration from the above newspaper, The Liberator, published by William Lloyd Garrison. The problem, however, with The Liberator, in Douglass's eyes, was that it was wholly written and published by a white man, and Douglass thought that a white man does not really know the plight of a slave while Douglass on the other hand, a former slave, does. The inspiration behind the naming of the newspaper was during these times, many slaves fleeing used the North Star as guidance to know where the north was since many states in the north had banned the practice of slavery. 

    When The North Star was first starting out, it was a weekly newspaper that sold for around $2, which was well above average since most yearly subscriptions to a paper were around $8-$10. The newspaper was only four pages long, with the fourth page entirely of ads. While the price was a significant barrier for many people, Douglass could still get around 4000 weekly readers. His readers were international, too, since people from Europe and the Carribeans read his paper. The North Star, however, was not a financial success for Douglass; just a year after starting the paper, Douglass had to mortgage his house just to keep the paper running. Then three years later, in 1851, he merged with The Liberty Party Paper to make The Frederick Douglass' Paper. In 1859 Douglass left for Europe to go on a speaking tour, and this departure effectively marked the end of The Frederick Douglass' Paper.

   While The North Star only lasted for four years and The Frederick Douglass' Paper only for eight years, these papers were unique in their approach by presenting black voices positively, and the author is a former slave. The impact of these papers was felt all across the union, with many people that read this being able to see and read stuff for black authors, possibly for the first time. These newspapers helped humanize black people but, most importantly, the slaves so that people could see that slaves were humans too and didn't deserve the lifestyle that was forced upon them.

They Won't Forget

    Since the dawn of the daily press, many people have long wondered how newspapers help shape what we think is the world around us. One of the most popular forms of newspapers "influencing" or shaping the public is a trial by the media. A trial by media is the impact of television and newspaper coverage on a person's reputation by creating a widespread reputation of guilt or innocence before or after a verdict in a court of law.  There have been notable examples of this with the OJ trial, the Mendez brothers, and, even more recently, the Amber Heard vs. Johnny Depp trial. These cases were massively televised and covered, lending the way for heavy media scrutiny and the reporter's opinions. The impact of the trial by media is shown heavily in the film. They Won't Forget. In the movie, the D.A. Andy Griffin, with the help of reporter William Brock, used the media to help get Griffin a big win in court to help boost his political career. Throughout the film, Brock and Griffin single out Robert Hale as their main scapegoat and use all the media influence they can to get him prosecuted.

    One of the film's first examples of media manipulation is towards the beginning when the police arrest Tump Redwine, a black school janitor. When the media caught wind of this, they put in the newspaper "Negro held in suspicion" as the headline. While negro was the "appropriate" term for African Americans at this time, the problem with this headline is at the time, whenever a black person was accused of a crime, they were always seen as 100% guilty in the eyes of people no matter the evidence especially if the crime was against a white woman which this one was. The newspaper knew what it was doing with this headline it could have been a man arrested and being held on suspicion, but the newspaper wanted the people to know it was a black man so they could demonize him. Later in the film, this headline is actually used to the cops and Griffin's advantage because they essentially intimidate Redwine into saying Hale was the murderer and if he chose not to, he would take the blame, and sadly at that time, a black man would likely lose that trial almost all the time.

    Another angle that Griffin used was that of the north vs. south. Hale was from New York and moved south to teach at a college. Even though the Civil War has long been over, the south still holds a lot of resentment toward the north. The south thinks the north thinks they are better than the south just because they won the Civil War; this way of thinking has turned to hatred of people up north. We see this, especially with Hale, with how they treat Hale, especially the name-calling they attack him with just because he is from up north. At the film's beginning, we see that Hale is still learning the southern ways since he was teaching on Confederate Memorial Day, which is usually a day off. The north vs. south is played up even more in the media when Hale's lawyer is also from the north, and the newspapers keep forcing the fact that Hale and his lawyer are from the north. The press says you are a "traitor" if you support Hale; since he is from up north, all southerners must be against him, or they are not true southerners. This way of regional thinking was prevalent; people were proud of their roots and origins. Especially after the Civil War, the south wanted to maintain its culture and identity, so they safeguarded and even made regional holidays like Confederate Memorial Day. 

    In the end, Griffin and Brock's strategy worked. Hale was sentenced to death, but on the way to his execution site, the governor decided to commute his death sentence and instead just punish him to life. Sadly, however, the people think Hale deserves death, so they abduct him from his train and kill him. Following his death, Hale's wife meets with Griffin and Brock, and in the meeting, she tells them that they are responsible for having her husband killed, not the mob. The mob was just a puppet of the media at that point; they were so mad that their sister was killed that they would just believe anything, even if there was no reason behind it, so when Hale became the scapegoat of the trial, of course, they would accept it especially since no other newspapers were even publishing conflicting viewpoints. Griffin and Brock might not have made the killing blow to Hale; they definitely played a massive part in his murder.

    People back then and even now are so susceptible to media manipulation we hear one thing on the news and take it as truth or an absolute fact. While the news will likely not lie to us, they will word questions and events in specific ways to make us think one way or another. Now with the advent of social media, this problem can be easily fixed by us diversifying our new sources; if we look at sources on both sides of the issue, we will eventually find the truth in the middle while it may take some more work on our part it is better than us speaking confidently on a topic we know nothing about. Some sites and sources can even help us see how biased and credible the news source we read, listen to, or watch is.

Political Cartoons

    The Each One Teach One that I found really interesting was the history of political cartooning. I always thought political cartoons were a new development made within the last 100 years, but I was very wrong. Political cartoons were made in 1720 with the collapse of the South Sea Company. I researched to see what was so special about this collapse that inspired the first political cartoon. The South Sea Company collapse is one of the world's foremost economic collapses. At that time, King George took control of the company in 1718, and with this "purchase," the company's stock grew astronomically, but the company's overall profits were the same. Even people within the company were encouraging others and, at times, bribing others to purchase stock. Then in 1920, the company bought the United Kindom's national debt, which was 32 million pounds at that time, for 7 million pounds, and the idea was that the company would pay for the debt with its ever-increasing stock sales. In August of that same year, however, the stock price plummeted 80% overnight, and with many of the population owning stock in the company, people were ruined. Sorry if that little blurb was extensive, but it does make sense why this was the first instance of political cartoons; this event combines bribery, corruption, and a substantial political figure in the king, and it was widespread enough that almost everyone felt the effects of it.

    Continuing on the idea of political cartoons, another thing that I found fascinating was the five elements of a political cartoon. They were symbols, exaggeration, irony, labeling, and analogy. While I must admit I am not a massive expert on political cartoons, I did not know how much time and effort really goes into making a good political cartoon because while they may look straightforward and childish at face value, they all hold profound meanings behind it if you take the time to look and analyze.

Why I Want to be a Journalist

    The history of me wanting to be a journalist is a short but simple one that I only fully knew some years ago. Growing up, funny enough, I was not interested in sports in the slightest my father would always watch football, baseball, and basketball in the house 24/7, it felt like, but personally, I did not care for sports in the slightest. All of this changed when in middle school, my father took me to my first basketball game, a Washington Wizards game. At the time, I still did not understand how the game of basketball was played, but I fell in love with the atmosphere; the constant cheering, booing, and sway of emotion were communicated through every fan, and that is something I thought was very cool.

    While sports was my passion at this time, I still had yet to think of sports journalism. So over the years, my dad and I progressively went to more and more Wizards games; we even went to some Redskins games at times, a professional football team now called the Commanders.  What caught my eye was a sports debate show called First Take. On this show, the two hosts, at that time they were Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith, would debate about the previous night of games and what they thought the implication of a win or a loss was. I became very interested in these sports debate shows. I would watch them all the time, and even as I watched the games, I could imagine the commentary about the game the next day. Even today, I watch shows like First Take, Undisputed, and Get Up. 

    My first taste of hands-on journalism would be in high school. At my high school, I helped work at my school newspapers from my sophomore all the way up to my senior year, while my junior year was a little work since COVID shut a lot of the stuff down. While working at my high school newspaper, I mostly did the sports section covering the games and doing a post-game report. The paper was small, so I did a lot of work but still had some help in this area. I had a fun three years helping make my school newspaper; this experience propelled me into the journalist scene.

    While my future is still uncertain to me in what areas of sports journalism I want, I know I want it to be somewhere in the sports world. Maybe in the next ten years, I will not even be a journalist scene, but as of right now, I am excited about what the future holds and who I might become.