Being the "First Woman"

There is a common theme when researching Lesley Visser and that is, she is a woman of "firsts". Almost every website and article with information on her said something along the lines of "the woman of firsts" or "another first for woman in sports, another first for Lesley Visser". Lesley Visser was one of the first woman in history to accomplish as much as she has in the sports broadcasting world. 

When I clicked on her website the first thing that comes up is her most notable list of accomplishments. A list of twenty or more "firsts". At first I was incredibly astonished that a woman could accomplish so much in a career. But then I realized why Visser is a woman of "firsts." Because prior to her there was no woman in sports media. There were a few woman here and there in sports media, but Visser was the first woman to compete her way through the men and tackle the challenge of becoming a well-known sports media woman. 

Her lists of first when it comes to experience is quite a long one, here is a list of her most notable "firsts." 

• 
  First and ONLY woman to conduct a Super Bowl Trophy presentation 
• First woman on NBA finals 
• First woman on the World Series
• First woman on the Final Tour 
• First woman assigned to a Super Bowl Sideline 
• First woman sportscaster to carry the Olympic Torch 
• First woman NFL analyst on TV and Radio 
• First woman assigned a Legendary Series for Monday Night Football on ABC 

As you can see this list is long for it being her most notable accomplishments. Another thing you can derive from the list is that each one starts with "first woman" because she was the first woman to accomplish these things. She didn't just stick her foot in the door she kicked her way through. She was determined to prove to the male audience and counterparts that she was just as good at sports reporting as they were, and boy did she prove them wrong. She not only beat a lot of them out, but she paved the way for females in the sports industry. 

Although today the number of females going into sports media may still be less than that of men there is definitely an increase due to Visser's accomplishments. She as an incredibly significant female journalists. As a woman going into journalism I look up to her because she has proven to me that no matter where you are going into you can fight your way through the patriarchy. 

Visser is not only a woman of "firsts" she is a woman of inspiration. Not just to woman in journalism and the media, but to all woman. She is a reminder that woman are strong and capable of doing incredible things. Sports is not just for men, it can be for women too. 

EOTO Reaction: The Historical Story of the "Newsies"

Everyone knows the iconic "Newsies" Broadway musical. However, do you know the historical story of how the newsboys became so famous? 

It all started in the 1800s when people actually read PAPER COPIES of the news. Yes, you read that correctly PAPER COPIES of the news, like an actual physical newspaper. Newsboys were typically young men who sold newspapers off the streets. They sold their papers for 50¢ a piece at first. The newsboys would profit half a cent per paper at this rate. 

The Spanish American War of 1899 hit. The newspaper companies raised the rate to 60¢ a paper, due to higher interest rates. After the war almost all the newspaper companies returned to their normal prices, except for two. The Evening World Journal and the New York Evening Journal were the two companies to keep their higher price. The newsboys were furious and they broke out in strike. 

On July 18, 1988 the strike began. A group of newsboys in Long Island began the strike by turning over a New York Journal newspaper stand. This set off a similar effect across New York and newsboys began overturning and destroying New York Evening Journal and Evening World Journal stands across the city. 

The July 18th strike was the biggest strike. Only days after that strike the newsboys held a rally in New York City. The senator, Timothy D. Sullivan, supported them. 5,000 boys from NYC and 2,000 from Brooklyn crowded the streets. Local politicians and businessman gave speeches in support of the young men. David Smith the union president at the time, addressed a list of grievances the boys had and introduced a list of solutions for the two companies to consider. He explained that the boys also needed to consider more peaceful and non-violent ways of protest. This event that occurred on July 24, 1899 was known as The Rally at 'Irving Hall'. 

After the rally the boys decided to approach the strike at a non-violent point of view. They stopped terrorizing others who sold the New York Evening Journal and the Evening World Journal and began to find other methods of protest. 

However, the strike came to a crashing end. Kid Blink, who was one of the strike leaders and gave a speech at Irving Hall eventually was caught in a scandal. Rumor had it that the newspaper executives had paid off Kid Blink to sell the newspapers. Kid Blink denied all rumors. However, as time went on his clothes became nicer and his fellow "newsies" did not believe him. The night the rumors broke Kid Blink was chased throughout the streets and was arrested by officers who thought he was misbehaving. 

This ended the strike as the boys did not have another leader with significant power to step up in Kid Blink's position. Soon after Kid Blink's scandal the companies offered a deal. The companies would keep the papers at 60¢, but would buy back any newspapers not sold at the end of the day. The newsboys agreed to it and that was the end of their strikes. 

Collateral Murder? Julius Assange? Does Give the U.S. A Good Look

 The question that has being going around almost a decade is did the United States commit a crime? Julius Assange an Australian man who created and infamous website WikiLeaks Leaked a video from a U.S. military helicopter that showed soldiers killing innocent people. The people that were killed were war journalists. The U.S. military claims to have mistaken one of their cameras for a gun, however, in the video it does not appear to look like a gun nor do the people seem to pose a threat to the military. 

The big question surrounding this WikiLeaks post is: was this collateral murder? In my opinion yes, it was collateral murder. Why? Because in the video you can hear the pilot of the helicopter not only enjoying, but finding excitement in shooting the innocent men down. They seem excited rather than remorse to be in war. 

What was more concerning was the U.S.'s response towards the innocent murders. The U.S responded by saying that the murders were not on purpose and was a mistake on the soldiers involved. However, after the release of the video that changed the thoughts of many people. 

The other part that did not help the U.S.'s side was the fact that they went after Julius Assange who posted the video. Assange was not the whistle blower. He was not the one who found the information and released it, but rather the creator of the website that it was released on. He is now in Britain in a prison waiting to find out his fate. He has suffered a heart attack and his health his greatly declined. 

This is obviously not a good look for the U.S. A lot of people are not only disappointed but question other war crimes that the U.S. has covered up. I think that as time goes on more evidence will surface to support war crimes. 

EOTO #3: How the Chilling Effect Ruined the Regulation of Communism

Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines "chilling effect" as "a usually undesirable discouraging effect or influence." In terms of journalism this usually relates to a government law that is too vague that causes people to feel that their rights have been violated or that the unjust law is preventing them from doing something. It usually results in a court case and some have even made it to the Supreme Court. 

During my research on the chilling effect I found significant research and a very compelling article that proved that the chilling effect was the reason that communism groups and communism in general was so hard to regulate in the U.S. The U.S. government tried to regulate groups in vague ways such as forcing them to registrar or making them report their interests. However, communism constituents found themselves angered by such vague laws that stepped on their rights. Their reaction towards the government regulations was the chilling effect, it made citizens interested in communism back out of groups or not pursue their political interests because they did not want the government to know what they were doing. 

Bagett v. Bullitt: 

In Bagett v. Bullitt (1964) the U.S. sees their first communism strike down due to the chilling affect. A U.S. regulatory law began requiring members of the government who worked in Washington to sign a loyalty oath claiming they were not a part of a subversive organization. The same regulation also required teachers nation wide undivided allegiance to the United States. This discouraged people from signing up for communist groups and teachers who were a part of communist groups felt that it was a violation of their First Amendment.

The Supreme Court ruled to overturn both laws arguing that it did violate the citizen's First Amendment right of association of speech. This is an example of the chilling effect because it discouraged both government officials and teachers from exploring other political views. 

Lamont v. Postmaster General: 

A year later, another communism case arose due to the chilling effect. Lamont v. Postmaster General was a case that required individuals to registrar with their local post office if they wanted mail regarding communism. 

The Supreme Court abolished the law when they decided that it "chilled" individuals wishes to explore other political views. The chilling effect applies here because most individuals did not registrar because they did not want the government to know their political views. Another violation of the First Amendment. 

Dombrowski v. Pfister: 

Dombrowski v. Pfister case involves two laws that Louisiana created called the Subversive Activities and Communist Control Law and the Communist Propaganda Control Law. Any organizations in Louisiana that dealt with communism where required to sign up as a communist-front organization. 

The laws were tried in the Supreme Court as it went against the First Amendment right to assembly. This caused the chilling effect because it discouraged people in Louisiana to start or be apart of a communist organization that was regulated by the government. 

These three Supreme Court cases are examples of how the chilling effect ruined the regulation of communism. As someone who has a grandmother that lived through the communism take-over in Germany, I do not like communism. As much as I would like communism groups to be regulated to prevent the take-over of a communist or socialist behavior there is nothing the government can do to regulate it because it would violate others First Amendment rights and cause the chilling effect. 

EOTO Presentation Reflection: Mary Margaret McBride

 Who was Mary Margaret McBridge? 

Mary Margaret McBride was a reporter at the Cleveland Press and the New York Evening Mail. She was significant because she was one of the first women reporters. She also was not only a writer, but spent a lot of time conducting her radio show where she played a woman named Martha Deane. She was deemed "The First Lady of Radio." 

Martha Deane "The First Lady of Radio" 

McBride decided to create a fictional character when she was on the radio. The fictional character was meant to appear to be a kind, witty, old woman. The Martha Deane character was designed to be a mother of six children with many grandchildren. She was told she had to memorize the names of the children and grandchildren and had to keep the persona of a grandmother instead of her own persona. 

Her job as an "older" woman on radio was to discuss philosophy. McBride eventually began writing under Deane when she wrote and edited for the Newspaper Enterprise Association's women's columns. 

McBride had trouble remembering her characteristics of Martha Deane. She often mixed up her grandchildren and would forget her "Martha Deane" personality. After about threes weeks as Martha Deane on the radio she decided to tell her audience that she was not a grandmother. She stopped the "grandmother" outlook and took on her own personal characteristics while keeping the name Deane. 

The Significance of a Women's Voice: 

Her voice on radio was extremely significant for women. Even though she did not use her real name she did her best to advocate for women topics and women voices. She was the first women voice to go on the radio and it brought a voice to other women. 

It was not just her radio production, but also her writer and editorial jobs for women columns that contributed to the extension of women voices. She talked about women philosophical ideas and helped make women opinions heard. 

Good Night and Good Luck: Never Stay Silent

How far can a journalist go before they risk their career, their life, and their sanity? It is a question that has been hanging in the air of all journalists for centuries. 

Do I write what I know, or do I write what they want to hear? Another question that journalists face everyday. Sometimes what the people deserve to know is not what they expect or want to hear. It also sometimes requires a journalist to risk their safety or career. 

Good Night and Good Luck is a film that tells the tale of journalist Edward R. Murrow, Fred Friendly, and Joseph Wershba. The reporters run a broadcasted night time news show. Murrow is the lead reporter who is featured on the show. The rest of the team works behind the scenes to help him research, interview, and put together the show. 

It comes to their attention that Milo Radulovich, a U.S. Air Force officer, was caught in scandal revolving his family being involved with communism. The journalists realized that the public needed to know about the problem. Upon searching for the documentation, they find out that it was sealed and kept out of the public eye. 

The journalists are warned not only by CBS their broadcast channel producers, but also from outsiders. Murrow decides to go forward with the story. After airing the story the journalists are praised on their discovery and reporting. 

The film shows other examples of the journalists process on reporting factual and newsworthy problems. However, it shows the deep struggle that reporters have when reporting on controversial topics. 

The film explains the struggle that reporters have when they need to report on controversial issues by showing how the journalists were personally attacked, some lost their jobs in the end, and their broadcast show was put on the back burner at CBS. 

This brings us back the question: should a journalists report on what they know or what their audience wants to hear? Sometimes reporting on what they know is the most honest path, but it can put their career and personal life on the line. This is the difficult part of being a journalist. How can you balance your own personal needs with your career needs. You need a job to support you and your family, but you also have to tell the people what they deserve to know. This has always been difficult for journalists to balance, but the film is a great reminder that good journalism is still welcome in the world and a good journalists informs the people about the truth. 

The Struggle for the Female Voice to be Heard

As a woman I find it inspiring when I hear what women in the past have done to get their voices heard. Winifred Sweet was one of the woman that went above and beyond to express her voice as a female. She is remarkable because she wrote about important topics that were almost unheard of for a woman to be reporting on during her time. She accomplished many things, not only as a woman, but also as a journalist. However, her accomplishments did not come easy she faced many challenges. 

FEMALE LABELS: 
Women have always been given labels throughout history. Before feminism women were considered "weak", "caregivers", or even "not-smart". However, as times have changed that has proven to be not true. 

Sweet was given one name during her time as a journalist. "Sob Sister." Dictionary.com defines Sob Sister "a journalist who writes human-interest stories with sentimental pathos." Sweet was definitely a journalist who writes human-interest stories with emotional passion. However, the name became a mark towards woman. It was often used as a label to say that woman were more emotional in their stories. The label caught on and most woman felt it was a disadvantage towards their writing. 

THE HURRICANE THAT PROVED FEMINISM STRENGTH: 
September of 1900 a hurricane swept through Galveston, Texas. The hurricane took 7,000 lives and was called the "Tidal Wave". 

Sweet wanted to share with the world the tragedy that had taken place, but as a female the police would not let her in. Sweet took it upon herself to dress as a boy and snuck past the guards. She took pictures and wrote a store for Hearst media. The published piece captured the horrific event. It helped raise awareness for the disaster. It even led to the Hearst company funding a relief hospital. 

Officials undermined Sweet because she was a female. She had to pretend she was a male reporter. Today, we know it was her who went out and reported on the disaster. It was her who helped care for those who were injured or had a loss. Sometimes passionate emotion is better than no empathy at all. 

WOMEN HELPING WOMEN: 
Sweet was also known for her work in helping bring justice to the female race. She was not only a role model to women everywhere, but she also helped women fight injustice. 

Sweet was assigned to investigate the care women were being given in the emergency system. Sweet knew that if women were begin care for recklessly that she could not just march right in and begin asking. Instead, she had to find her way in a natural way. 

Sweet staged an "emergency test". She decided to faint in the middle of a public setting. People called an ambulance for help. However, she was not immediately brought to the hospital. She was probed by police. After the probing, she was brought to the hospital, but was treated rudely by the staff and doctors. 

Her test and report led to the discovery of a major scandal within the emergency system. She change the medical world for women. 

REFLECTION ON FEMINISM IN EARLY HISTORY: 
Sweet faced many challenges as woman, but she also paved the way for women in the world and in journalism. She is the reason I can study journalism in school today. She is the reason I can be a journalist in my future. She is the reason women are journalists reporting on war, the pandemic, and other important topics today. She changed the game for women everywhere and that is what makes Winifred Sweet so remarkable. 

What We Should Anticipate if the U.S. Enter WWIII

 The United States has fought through many wars. Some involved fighting oversees while others involved fighting on the homeland or both. Journalists have struggled to get their voices heard during war periods. Dating back to WWI journalists have been issued different rules that they must follow when reporting on war. Is this a violation of journalists first amendments rights or is this a valid protection for the United States?

World War I and II: 

World War I and II had the most censorship. Was this because these were extremely big wars?Maybe, but it also may have been a cover up by the government. 

The Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918 suppressed the voices of journalists. It put restrictions on what journalists could write about and report to the world. The government claims that the reason behind the suppression was because they wanted to "protect" the country's military and their plans for attack. Officials were worried that certain information would give other countries the means to plan attacks or to gain knowledge about a U.S. attack. 

Daniel Smyth says in his article Avoiding Bloodshed? US Journalists and Censorship in Wartime, that "The Post Office blocked about seventy-five newspapers from mail, including the Public for saying America should avoid loans and increase taxes to pay for the war and the Milwaukee Leader for saying

America was fighting for 'washed up allies'." This is one of the many examples that Smyth gives explaining the censorship actions the U.S. government took against journalists. Many journalists faced criminal charges or had to face the truth that their publication would not be published. 

World War II had very similar restrictions to journalism. Journalists began to conclude that some people may be restricting their speech to protect themselves. For example, Smyth says the U.S. restricted journalists from reporting on, "movements of the president (this rule rankled many reporters who believed President Roosevelt used it to hide travels to his mistress)." Another example, "General Douglas MacArthur suppressed information that presented him or his forces unflatteringly and blocked casualty updates unless correspondents described them as 'light' or 'low'." Although people speculate that public figures are trying to protect themselves from sabotage or attacks, there is reason to believe that it was done for other reasons. In later wars such as the Korean War and the Vietnam War this rule to protect officials in not reinstated. 

What Does This Mean if We Have WWIII? 

During war the U.S. has used measures to censor journalists from expressing war matters. As time has gone on most of those restrictions have changed or gone away. In the Korean, Vietnam, and Persian Gulf War the restrictions were open ended and easier to get away with. However, it has been argued that the restrictions were limited because the wars took place oversees and did not endanger American citizens. 

Does that mean that World Wars are the most restricted wars for journalists? History says yes. World War I and II have had the most restrictions and have censored the most against journalists. 

In the past few weeks we have seen Russia and Ukraine go head to head. Today it was announced that
Russia will begin the fight. The United States has already begun poking its way into war matters with these two countries. Will this be the next World War III? The answer is unknown, but the outlook as of today, February 14th does not look bright. This means that not only citizens and the world will be separated into a battle, but journalists may face restrictions on their rights to speech. 

The United States has censored journalists many times before we know they are not afraid to do it again. With Joe Biden as president it is clear that the U.S. will most likely enter the war immediately. Biden has tried to keep his foreign affairs a secret, but the people deserve to know what is going on. The real answer lies within history and the future. Now is the time for journalists to begin writing, to begin informing the people. They need to prepare for the restrictions and censorship that may lie in the near future. 

A Reflection: The American Society of Magazine Editors

Chloe Brussard and Cassandra Mischak presented their EOTO projects on The American Society of Magazine Editors on Thursday afternoon. The America Society of Magazine Editors (ASME) is a group of individuals that are journalists and editors in the United States. The group of individuals was established in 1963. The ASME members fight for their First Amendment rights, and protects and serves as a spokesperson for editors and journalists. The society is a great way for journalists and editors to work together and meet new people. 

How Can You Become a Member? 
To become a member of the ASME you must be a journalist or editor. There are four levels of membership. The first is chief editor, second is editor, third is retired editor, and fourth is ASME NEXT. The board of directors is made up of 16 individuals that are elected every two years. 

Awards and Collaborative Work: 
ASME awards journalists and editors for their outstanding work. The awards have previously been for fiction writing, print magazines, and websites. The award ceremonies are meant to bring a link between historical fictional writing and the newer magazine and online writing forms. 

ASME works closely with The Association of Magazine Media (MPA). MPA works with journalists and editors to help them advocate for their First Amendment right in both federal and state levels. Both organizations work together as a backbone for journalists and editors to reach out to when they find themselves fighting for their First Amendment right. 

Pictured above: ASME award 

The Presentation and a Final Reflection: 
The presenters did a great job explaining the significance, history, and motive the group has to help journalists and editors. The ASME presentation caught my attention because the group offers protection of the First Amendment. It is common that journalists rights can be stepped on. The government and individuals do not like criticism. Journalists often find themselves fighting for their right of free speech and freedom of the press. This organization, along with the MPA helps combat the issues preventing journalists from pursuing their First Amendment. 

ASME also helps journalists and editors network. Having a group of individuals in the same career path helps them connect with each other. New and incoming journalists such as myself may have the chance to connect with someone who has been in the business for years. 

ASME is a great resource for individuals and journalists seeking protection of their First Amendment right or looking to begin a connection with another member. 

The Survival of Journalism in the Colonies

As a journalist if fascinates me how little journalism existed in the early days of the colonies. The reason there was little journalism was because most publications were shut down by British rule. Obviously, this angered the colonist. The idea of "no taxation without representation" in some ways falls under this. Part of being represented was allowing the colonist to have newspapers to share information. Most colonist did not know what was going on across the pond in Britain, due to the lack of not having a strong newspaper in the colonies. The colonist did not like the power that Britain had over them to shut such things down. It is one of the big reasons that our American values shares the idea of the publics check on government. We have journalists to check our government, by expressing what the people want changed. 

The Boston News Letter was not the first newspaper in the colonies. It was technically the second one. However, the first printed newspaper, Publick Occurrences, was only printed once. It was shut down immediately by British rule. The Boston News Letter was the first newspaper to be printed more than once. In fact in stayed in print for 72 years. The Boston News Letter was eventually shut down by the British, but it stayed in print for years. 

The Boston News Letter was not supposed to be a newspaper, but rather a political letter between two colonists. John Campbell wrote political letters to Connecticut's Governor Fitz-John Winthrop. Campbell began writing to other political leaders too. Everyone loved Campbell's political and newsworthy updates that they urged him to turn them into a newspaper. With the help of John Green, Campbell started the Boston News Letter (hence the newspapers name). 

The big question is: how did The Boston News Letter continue to be published, when other newspapers were being shut down? 

There is no clear answer as to how The Boston News Letter continued its publications for 72 years under British law. However, it is clear that at the the time of its publication the newspaper was not just a luxury to the colonists, but a need. They also needed a place to obtain information about what was happening locally and in Britain. Campbell, understood that people wanted their political voice to be heard. He left the last page of the newspaper blank for readers to contribute to the dialogue. This was significant because it helped fuel the new idea of the "marketplace of ideas". 

A lot of sources have concluded that it is not so much that it was allowed to be published, but rather that it survived British rule. The paper printed stories and ideas that the British definitely did not like, but it prevailed and continued publishing stories. 

The truth is there were lots of journalists in the early days of the colonies. That is why the concept of the "marketplace of ideas" eventually took shape. People have opinions and need a place to voice them. However, their voices were suppressed by the king. The Boston News Letter survived because those journalists needed a place to publish their voice.

DEFINE JOURNALISM: Why we need more REAL journalists

 Journalism was first invented as a method to check government. In the United States a newspaper was first invented to keep the colonist informed on important information such as government (both international and national) and other things happening within the community such a weddings, deaths or other events. Journalism has always been a way for a journalists to communicate with a large on audience on information they deserve to know. 

However, journalism has always been highly controversial. The definition of journalism has varied since the founding fathers began the United States and created the First Amendment, which gave journalists freedom of speech. 

I define journalism as people who express their opinion, state facts, begin new dialogue and contribute to a discussion. I am a journalist. I love writing opinion pieces, doing research to bring new facts to those who need to know them, and contributing to a discussion. 

Journalism has become very hard. There is the constant argument that journalism no longer exists. Mostly, because today, anyone can become a journalist. In just a few minutes and clicks on a computer you can start your own personal blog or post to a blogging website. No one needs a degree in journalism to express their opinion or release news bearing facts anymore. 

So the big question is: why would I want to become a journalist? 

When I tell people that I am studying journalism the most common response is, "finally, we need better journalists in our world." I always question what they mean by this. There are plenty of fantastic journalist that I read every day. I finally came to the decision after a conversation with my mother that it is not so much that we need "better" journalists, but rather we need journalists that want to deliver factual information that better the people. 

All you need to be a journalist is the ability to write. However, being a good journalist is much harder, you need to learn how to provide the people with the information they deserve to know. Not everyone knows how to do that. In recent years, people have discovered that journalists have covered up information that the public ought to know. Journalists also need to learn to present every side of the story with room for discussion. Most journalists today do not do this. 

To answer the big question: I want to be a journalist because I want to provide the public with information that they deserve to know in a way that is bipartisan and opens a discussion. We need to better define journalism and journalists. I am not just a journalist, but an advocate for the people. A REAL journalist advocates and acts for the people.