Ever since Newton Minow taught us sophisticates to bemoan the descent of television into a vast wasteland, the dyspeptic chorus of jeremiahs who insist that television news in particular has gone from gold to dross gets noisier and noisier. Charles Ponce de Leon says here, in effect, that this is misleading, if not simply fatuous. He argues in this well-paced, lively, readable book that TV news has changed in response to broader changes in the TV industry and American culture. It is pointless to bewail its decline. "That s the Way It Is "gives us the very first history of American television news, spanning more than six decades, from Camel News Caravan to Countdown with Keith Oberman and The Daily Show. Starting in the latter 1940s, television news featured a succession of broadcasters who became household names, even presences: Eric Sevareid, Walter Cronkite, David Brinkley, Peter Jennings, Brian Williams, Katie Couric, and, with cable expansion, people like Glenn Beck, Jon Stewart, and Bill O Reilly. But behind the scenes, the parallel story is just as interesting, involving executives, producers, and journalists who were responsible for the field s most important innovations. Included with mainstream network news programs is an engaging treatment of news magazines like "60 Minutes" and "20/20, " as well as morning news shows like "Today" and "Good Morning America." Ponce de Leon gives ample attention to the establishment of cable networks (CNN, and the later competitors, Fox News and MSNBC), mixing in colorful anecdotes about the likes of Roger Ailes and Roone Arledge. Frothy features and other kinds of entertainment have been part and parcel of TV news from the start; viewer preferences have always played a role in the evolution of programming, although the disintegration of a national culture since the 1970s means that most of us no longer follow the news as a civic obligation. Throughout, Ponce de Leon places his history in a broader cultural context, emphasizing tensions between the public service mission of TV news and the quest for profitability and broad appeal."

Can a free press survive in an era of free content? An “entertaining and well-written” examination of copyright law, its history, and its purpose (New York Law Journal). You can’t copyright facts, but is news a category unto itself? Without legal protection for the “ownership” of news, what incentive does a news organization have to invest in producing quality journalism that serves the public good? Can a free press survive in the era of free content? This book explores the intertwined histories of journalism and copyright law in the United States and Great Britain, revealing how shifts in technology, government policy, and publishing strategy have shaped the media landscape. Publishers have long sought to treat news as exclusive to protect their investments against copying or “free riding.” But over the centuries, arguments about the vital role of newspapers and the need for information to circulate have made it difficult to defend property rights in news. Beginning with the earliest printed news publications and ending with the Internet, Will Slauter traces these countervailing trends, offering a fresh perspective on debates about copyright and efforts to control the flow of news. “A well-written, thoughtful book, demonstrating how copyright law has struggled to keep up with the development of news culture, setting out the historical context in great detail and supported by much research, and with interesting conclusions and predictions for the future. It is unreservedly recommended.” ––European Intellectual Property Review

Looks at the emerging phenomenon of online journalism, including Weblogs, Internet chat groups, and email, and how anyone can produce news.

What's fair? It is an old question in journalism. In 1999, it seems more difficult to answer than ever. The cycle of story, spin, and counterspin that surrounds the White House is only the most obvious part of the problem. In the past 25 years, the practice of journalism has changed enormously--particularly in the United States. The demarcation of public and private life that once ruled certain kinds of stories out-of-bounds has eroded, leaving reporters with the unenviable challenge of having to cover events whose seaminess inevitably taints all who touch them. Commercial pressures, and a tidal wave of information and entertainment media, have engulfed the news business--leaving the definitions of journalism and journalistic standards vague and uncertain. And the technology of news reporting is speeding up news cycles in ways that leave little time for sober and measured judgments.What's Fair? is a collection of essays from experts in the field that are sure to spark compelling questions and ideas about journalism and its place in our time. In "Fairness--A Struggle," journalists explore a subject that they normally share only with close friends and colleagues--their own struggles with fairness that occurred in places as different as South Africa, Washington, and the South Bronx. In "Fairness--A History," nine contributors examine the history of the fairness question, specifically the establishment of the Hutchins Commission report of 1947, which is evaluated here by a historian, a journalist and a First Amendment authority. In a comparative vein, two authorities on international communications law examine British regulations for fairness in broadcasting at the end of the 20th century. In "Fairness--A Goal," contributors explore what struggles for fairness mean in a variety of contexts, from American newsrooms to post-Communist Poland to Northern Ireland.Many discussions of fairness are either numbingly abstract or impossibly righteous. To avoid those hazards, Robert Giles and Robert Snyder have grounded this volume in stories--the kind of stories journalists tell each other and the kind of stories people tell about journalism. This volume is a testament to journalism that is free yet fair, probing yet credible and authoritative in content yet open to many voices.Robert Giles is editor-in-chief of Media Studies Journal, senior vice president of the Freedom Forum and executive director of Media Studies Center. Formerly the editor and publisher of The Detroit News, he is the author of Newsroom Management: A Guide to Theory and Practice.Robert W. Snyder is editor of the Media Studies Journal, a historian, and most recently author of Transit Talk: New York's Bus and Subway Workers Tell Their Stories. He has taught at Princeton University and New York University, from which he holds a doctorate in history.

Everything kids need to know to tell facts from “fake news” on the internet. Here’s a comprehensive guide to how real journalism is made, what “fake news” is and, most importantly, how to spot the difference. It provides practical advice, thought-provoking examples, and loads of explanations, definitions and useful context. Never judgmental, it encourages young people to approach what they find online with skepticism and helps them hone their critical-thinking skills to make good choices about what to believe and share. It’s a must-read book on a topic that couldn’t be more important in today’s online world. Sure, kids know how to look for things on the internet. Now they’ll know how to look at them, too.

This instructive and entertaining social history of American newspapers shows that the very idea of impartial, objective “news” was the social product of the democratization of political, economic, and social life in the nineteenth century. Professor Schudson analyzes the shifts in reportorial style over the years and explains why the belief among journalists and readers alike that newspapers must be objective still lives on.

With 200 thought-provoking and lighthearted writing prompts and exercises organized into chapters based on his life, My Grandfather’s Life guides your grandfather to begin his life’s memoir and create a fully realized record of his adventures, stories, and wisdom for you and your family to cherish for future generations.

If a newspaper today uncovered a monumental story and published it on their front page, readership would not change. The story would be on every major news website in minutes. All the twenty-four hour news stations would be reporting on the story within the hour. Despite secondary authors giving the original author credit for the story, the advertising revenue would not change hands. No consequential profit would fall upon the first reporter for the facts uncovered. The news industry's future is bleak as well. Media corporation investors are calling for only three national newspapers, and the diverse flow of ideas myriad reporters provide will soon be gone. However, the forecast does not have to be so grim.With just a slight change to the current fair use doctrine, newspapers could recover their loyal readership and could once again reap revenue for top-caliber news reporting. For twenty-four hours, national news websites could state a primary author's headline with a link to the story's homepage distributing the information to readers. The same day a story breaks, evening news channels could pay to license the facts, which would allow the initial reporter, or his newspaper, to recover more profit. Each newspaper in the country could reap revenue from its reporters while newly self-employed freelance journalists could find financial success in doing what they do best - researching and writing stories.This article proposes a change to current copyright law to bring more profit in news reporting. The alteration centers around allowing journalists, and the companies they work for, to own 98% of the investigated and researched facts they uncover for twenty-four hours after the story is first published. Part I examines the current state of the media and the effect of the Internet on the news business. Part II summarizes the economic and public policies behind protecting information. Part III analyzes the current copyright law's protection of information while Part IV does the same with misappropriation law. Part V describes the proposed amendment to current copyright law, points out a few legal and practical obstacles to be resolved, and ultimately concludes that the benefits far outweigh the potential problems.