My other review--Red Hot Chili Peppers

OK friends and fans, I figured it was time I put something else here. Anywho, I put up my Nacho Libre review for my feature writing class from last fall. Here is the other review from that class. Although I'm a bit critical, I am a fan of both things I reviewed; but it's a critic's job to critique, right?

Uncle Sam’s Music Reviews

The Red Hot Chili Peppers have talent – and money

The Red Hot Chili Peppers have made a career out of being unconventional. Too bad their “Greatest Hits and Videos” CD/DVD follows the conventional route – sort of.

The Chili Peppers use a number of marketing tricks to help sell this 2003 compilation. First, they combine a CD and a DVD into one package. Because of the burgeoning popularity of multimedia, this phenomenon has become increasingly prevalent in recent years. The CD is also sold separately for those who prefer not to cough up a few extra bucks to watch bass guitarist Flea jam out while dancing half-naked in the band’s music videos.

This leads us to their next marketing ploy. The songs on the CD are not all the same ones that are on the DVD. For example, the two biggest joints from the 2002 album “By the Way,” besides the title track, are “Can’t Stop” and “The Zephyr Song.” While these songs can be found on the greatest hits DVD, they are conspicuously missing from the CD. Considering “By the Way” was released only a year before “Greatest Hits,” it stands to reason that the band was hoping to sell some more albums in addition to the greatest hits disc.

Furthermore, the album’s release was carefully planned to allow it stocking-stuffer status in time for the holidays for the times when, you know, you just gotta have a new music CD.

Despite the usual shenanigans artists and record labels use to sell their product, the fact remains that the vast majority of the music on this disc is both unique and of high-caliber artistry. Their innovative fusion of rock, funk and rap have made them pioneers of a difficult-to-define genre that has musicians from “Around the World” – the title of one the band’s cuts – copying their style (on the off-chance that you’re Chilean, you may have heard of Chili Peppers sound-alike Chancho en Piedra – “Pig on Rock”).

Many of the videos are well produced and include relevant subject matter. The computer animation for the “Californication” video – whose lyrics and visual content are not what you would expect based on the track’s title – would probably challenge the graphics quality of the new PlayStation 3. The band members, as gaming characters, take turns running, swimming, jumping and generally avoiding destruction in the video. This destruction symbolizes Californication – buying into what Hollywood tells us is cool. A telling lyric from the song: “Pay your surgeon very well to break the spell of aging. Celebrity skin, is this your chin, or is that war your/you’re waging?”

The versatility of the Red Hot Chili Peppers shines through on “Greatest Hits.” They play the kind of stuff you can rock out to, such as the up-tempo, catchy “Fortune Faded,” one of the two mandatory previously unreleased songs, and the early ’90s classic “Give it Away.” However, although the Chili Peppers still know how to make you move with their pulsating beats and wailing guitars, they’ve added a finer sense of melody and usage of hooks, especially in their most recent albums, starting with “Californication” in 1999.

It is this ability to combine seemingly unrelated musical elements – driving rock, mellow ballads, classic funk sounds and even a Stevie Wonder cover – into a coherent end product that expands both the group’s audience and Chili Peppers’ wallets.

The release of greatest hits albums often signifies the end –or at least the beginning of the end – of a group. Not so with the Red Hot Chili Peppers. In 2006, they released “Stadium Arcadium,” which has enjoyed both critical and commercial success, selling millions of copies worldwide.

Despite some flaws and the previously mentioned annoying marketing tricks, the Red Hot Chili Pepper’s greatest hits album delivers a combination of melodies, guitar riffs and percussion that show the true range and talent of this entertaining group.

Plus, Warner Bros. Records wanted to find a way to reach the fans who hadn’t yet bought any Chili Peppers albums.


Extras: cover/insert with photos and commentary; DVD commentaries/tours with the band and “making of” videos.

Overall grade: B

For comments, e-mail Uncle Sam at sams@byu.edu

My NBA Finals prediction

A movie review I did for a class way back in November

I'm not sure why I'm posting this now. I guess it's about time. We had to do some reviews for a class I took in the Fall 'o6 semester. I reviewed Nacho Libre because I thought it had some funny parts, and I figured I could write a funny review on it. The best part is that the teacher loved it and I got 30/30 points. The previous paper I had gotten kind of a disappointing grade.

My world had come crashing down.

Okay, it wasn't that big of a deal, but it was nice to get the good grade on this one.

Without further ado:

Uncle Sam’s Movie Review

Nacho packs plenty of cheese

Director Jared Hess, known for his cult classic “Napoleon Dynamite,” now has a more impressive film to add to his résumé: “Nacho Libre.”
But the man who really makes the movie is Jack Black.

Black stars as Ignacio, aka Nacho, a Mexican friar who works at a Catholic monastery, but secretly moonlights as a “luchador.” Nacho’s duties consist of preparing meals for orphan children and clergymen. Nacho is frustrated with his lack of ministerial duties, but you quickly understand why he rarely receives such assignments when he gives a eulogy for a supposed dead man who is, in fact, still alive.

Although he works at the monastery, Nacho develops a crush for the new (and only) woman at work – the lovely Sister Encarnación (Ana de la Reguera). Nacho goes so far as to make her an extra special salad, filled with lettuce, tomato, crushed chips and a veritable lake of ranch dressing. He also professes his love by sliding multiple slices of rock-hard toast under the bedroom door of the object of his affection.


The film has more conflict than what you see on the surface or in the previews. In fact, this is one of the movie’s ongoing themes, as Nacho’s devout Christianity clashes with wrestling partner Esqueleto’s (Hector Jimenez – his character’s name is Spanish for skeleton) ironically strict belief in science. Besides, the scrawny, brief-rocking, savage Esqueleto hates orphans, and Nacho works in an orphanage. Now that’s drama, folks!

Nacho’s inspiration to wrestle emerges when he sees a poster claiming a handsome cash reward for the winner of a wrestling tournament. Our hero and Esqueleto take their share of lumps in the ring from a gamut of unusual characters, including a tag team of ferocious midgets who wear masks of an unusual horned lion-like beast.

As much as I push the idea that this movie features romance, action and everything between, the fact remains that “Nacho Libre” is a comedy – a comedy with better wrestling scenes than you can find on cable television.

All the while, Nacho and Esqueleto form a beatable – yes, you read that correctly – wrestling duo, that, despite a sketchy win-loss record, earns enough money to provide field trips and better food for the orphans, while buying themselves some fancy duds. Nacho even tries to impress Sister Encarnación with his uber-tight “leisure clothes” one night.

On the other hand, if you don’t like seeing portly guys in pale blue stretchy pants with red underoos on the outside, maybe you should skip this movie. Better yet, just cover your eyes during those parts. As crazy as this movie is, if you’re a fan of slapstick, “Nacho” is your cup of salsa.

“Nacho” tries a little too hard to force laughter upon its audience. With Black’s cut-up singing and wacky lyrics/dialogue, the humor – similar to his performance in “School of Rock” – is a bit juvenile and overdone. For example, at one point Nacho sings a song about Sister Encarnación and his dedication to the ministry. He sweetly croons about the possibility of breaking his vows of celibacy: “No, no, no way, José! … Unless you want to. Then we’d break our vows together!”

(Maybe you like this version of the song!)

The basis of this somewhat flimsy plot: live a dream by becoming a wrestler, get the cash that comes with that, and help the orphans have a better life. Although the film is actually based loosely – we’re talking street corner-lady loose – on the life of a Mexican minister/wrestler who taught about God according to his manner, the content is a bit farfetched.

Additionally, the film falls well short of “Napoleon” in terms of quotability.

But now I’m just getting too picky. The truth is, this film is enjoyable if and when you are in the mood for some lighthearted viewing. Before you watch “Nacho,” just make sure you expect it to be stupid. That’s what I expected, and fortunately, the movie far exceeded my expectations. I even went back for a second helping of Nacho at the theater (bad pun intended).

As Nacho would say in that well-mimicked Mexican accent, “it’s fantastic!”

Rated PG for some violence and mature themes.
Uncle Sam’s grade: B+

For comments, e-mail Uncle Sam at sams@byu.edu

The work of photographer Heather Shimmin

There are many reasons why people become interested in hobbies. Some folks take on a leisure pursuit that their friends enjoy as a way to have fun together. Others develop likes and dislikes similar to those of their parents. Furthermore, some individuals look to go on their own and find their own unique interests.

Our experiences help shape who we are. The things we do and the things we discover lead to further action that may arouse our curiosity in new activities.

For Heather Shimmin, many interests have led her into her work as a photographer. Originally studying design, but wanting to work in a commercially viable art without spending all day in front of a computer, Shimmin eventually changed gears and earned her degree in photography from Utah Valley State.

The range of activities Shimmin has participated in is broad. She enjoys traveling, playing guitar, cycling, hiking and spending time outdoors. In her youth, Shimmin only dabbled in photography. However, all of her activities have, as she said, “bled” into her life of photography. Her love of outdoors and travel fit in perfectly with her love of art, particularly the art of taking pictures. Among her favorite subjects are cityscapes, travel photography and shots that portray lifestyle, preferring these to pictures of nature.

Now, with seven years of photographic experience under her belt, Shimmin shoots weddings and family activities, and takes product shots and business portraits. Though Shimmin said she views weddings as a photography staple within the state of Utah, she said she would rather take on a new assignment. For example, shooting a Jewish Bar Mitzvah would be fun, she said.

Despite some distaste for sitting in front of a computer, the new age of digital photography has required that she still spend many hours on a computer in order to do her work.

One benefit of digital photography, as opposed to film photography, is saving money. Digital cameras make it possible to delete photos that don’t turn out exactly as planned, rather than spending money to develop the film of every picture taken. The digital pictures are also easy to manipulate and store on computers. This allows the photographer to delete the pictures from the camera’s memory stick, creating room for new pictures to be taken.

“I like photography because it’s neat, not like a painting that takes so long,” Shimmin said, adding she enjoys the ability to immediately see and correct her photography, thanks to digital cameras. “Perhaps it’s the ADD coming through,” she joked.
Digital photography, however, is not without its disadvantages, at least as far as the professionals are concerned. It is now easier for everyone to become a photographer, Shimmin said.

“If there’s a family event, someone might say ‘Uncle Joe has camera. He can do it,’ so it makes it harder for professionals to find work,” Shimmin said.

Shimmin has found that certain elements are crucial to make her photography more than just ordinary. It’s important to notice what is interesting about a scene and to make that subject the focus of a given shot. Sometimes it is necessary to get closer to a subject to ensure it is adequately emphasized. Additionally, the location of the photographer is important, as some subjects will require unusually high or low camera angles.

Creativity is a vital part of good photography, Shimmin said. Many amateurs take pictures of the same cliché objects. For example, although a sunset may look nice, it does not stand out in the world of photography because most people have already seen and taken similar pictures, she said. For good photo ideas, Shimmin suggested looking at others’ work in magazines.

Proper lighting is essential to highlight a subject in a photo. Overcast skies are ideal for taking portraits because they create a giant softbox. In other words, you will only see soft shadows around a subject if you take the picture while the weather is overcast.

Being patient, taking time and taking many shots are other ways photographers can get the image quality they desire.

Just remember: patience is a virtue—and so is lighting, when it comes to photography.

Interview with media man and Pulitzer Prize winner John Hughes

Here is my interview with Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist John Hughes, former editor of the Christian Science Monitor and the Deseret Morning News. The interview took place on April 2, 2007.

Scorup: Can you talk about some of the changes you saw in media that made you say “Wow! What’s going on?”

Hughes: Sure. Well, when I started in this business, we used to write our stories on something called a typewriter. And that was hard copy and it was edited at the copy desk by regional editors. Then it would go out to the composing room and there would be these old linotype machines that…well, it was molten lead. You had these slugs of lead and then you melted the lead and put it in and your story was re-keyboarded, and what they were doing was they were punching the letters as they were typing into the molten lead, which then they made the slugs the column width and they lay them in a form and it had a metal frame and then they screwed the frame tight. Then they put asbestos mat over it and transferred all the impressions form the type onto the mat. Then the mat was taken out and put onto a half-cylinder metal plate and then on one plate which made up one page, then the other page would be like that, and that’s how it was bolted onto the rollers onto the machine and then the press would set up. Today, nobody uses a typewriter. They use a computer. Reporters use laptops all the time. It goes right into the computer and [the] home office. It’s edited at a computer and moves from computer to computer around the newsroom. Then somebody presses a button and makes a page and the page is on the computer. Then you send it off.

So the whole process has changed tremendously. And for the better. Except that one of the problems it has created is there really is not much time between the time the story is written and the time it appears, or if it’s on television, it’s live. So the consequences of getting it right are much more important and the consequences of getting it wrong are much more serious because, if you’re reporting for a big network, all kinds of decisions could be made on the basis of what you wrote, and what you published may turn out to be false. You may be wrong. So that’s changed a lot.

Scorup: Were there any changes in media, maybe with new technology, that you saw as a kid or as an adult that you didn’t see coming that maybe would change everything?

Hughes: Yeah. I think none of us editors in my generation—a few maybe—but I don’t think any of us foresaw that the internet would become so pervasive so fast. At the paper I was most recently at, the Deseret Morning News, we had an internet new media group, maybe about nine people, and they were taking stuff out of the paper and putting it on the web and using some other stuff. [Photographers] would go to kids’ soccer matches , so they would not only take pictures of what you wanted for the paper, but they would take pictures of all the players, put them up on the Web, and mom and dad say “oh, I want a picture of Tommy.” Call the Deseret News, [pay] 25 bucks, send you whatever it is and you get a nice picture of your kid. So all that has changed, but it took quite a time for newspapers to figure out how to make money out of it, and that is just beginning to happen. The advertising is just beginning to understand the value of the internet, and the internet is becoming more and more important. So you have a problem with newspapers. On the one hand, they’re losing circulation because guys your age probably don’t read a print newspaper; you get your news on a computer. I’ve got CNN on my laptop here. So newspapers have to learn how to merge into the internet era. It’s causing a lot of problems.

Scorup: Did TV ever make you think news or the whole media game would change?

Hughes: No. I didn’t think TV was going to change it because we had radio before and it was “oh, radio! It’s the demise of the newspaper!” Then they said “TV! It’s the demise of the newspaper!” But I knew it wouldn’t be because it’s a different medium. Television is the medium of images. It’s pictures, pictures, pictures. People will tell you in television if you can’t get pictures, it’s hard to get the story on air. Newspapers, I think, are the medium of ideas. TV does a marvelous job of covering breaking news, and now, instantly. First of all, with radio, the world became wired for sound. Then with television, CNN, it became wired for pictures so that almost anything that happens anywhere you can see on the screen. But I think newspapers survive very well indeed in the TV era because [as] Walter Cronkite, who of course was a TV guy, said, if you count all the words in a 30-minute TV broadcast—which is 22 minutes, because you’ve got 8 minutes of ads—there are less than half-a-page of The New York Times.

I had a good friend, Gene Roberts, who was managing editor of The New York Times, and he said when there has been an amazing event somewhere—like a guy lands on the moon, and you can see that live on television, so the reader has seen the whole story of the guy walking on the moon, and so on—the circulation of The New York Times does not go down; it goes up. People want to read a story to explain the significance of what it was they saw. They want the sidebar and the analysis of what it means. So no, I don’t think television meant the demise of the newspaper; it’s competition. But I think there’s a very real question now as to whether the internet will mean the demise of the print newspaper. I don’t think it’s going to happen next year, but I think it is something we will have to watch.

Scorup: You’ve been the editor of the Christian Science Monitor and the Deseret Morning News. Tell me a little bit about those jobs and how they’re similar and how they’re different.

Hughes: They’re different in that the Christian Science Monitor is a newspaper mainly known for its international and national coverage. It’s not much of a local newspaper, whereas the Deseret News is very much a local/regional newspaper. Where at the Monitor you were dealing with a staff of foreign correspondents you sent abroad and they were in different countries and you had a big Washington bureau, at the Deseret News, most of the coverage you generated yourself was local. We had reporters in Salt Lake City, we had a reporter in St. George, we had a reporter in Washington, D.C. But the Washington reporter's job was to be absolutely focused on anything happening there affecting Utah. Some regional reporters go to Washington, and after six months they’re seduced by the White House and the Pentagon and the State Department. We don’t want that from our correspondent because we’ve got all that stuff. We’ve got the AP, we’ve got Reuters, [and] we’ve got The New York Times service. The Deseret News gets its national and international coverage from [them].

Scorup: You have extensive experience with international media. You’ve dealt with prime ministers and other foreign dignitaries. How has that influenced your life and did you ever picture that happening, say, a couple decades before it happened?

Hughes: No. Actually, I was astonished most of my life that someone would actually pay me to go out there to talk to prime ministers and presidents and cover wars and revolutions because, if you’re a journalist, you have a ringside seat on history in the making. It’s very exciting, so I never felt I had a dull day.

Scorup: They say sometimes the difference between news and history is a matter of minutes…

Hughes: That’s right. That’s right, and the newspaper is simply chronicling an event or an occurrence or an interview as it happened in that short period of time. The historian comes in afterwards and finds out maybe the prime minister lied to you, or whatever. You’re only writing a sliver of history each day with the newspaper, and if you get it wrong you have the obligation to correct it the next day. You have the opportunity to correct it, whereas a historian is looking at the whole breadth of a president’s life [for example] and digging into it and has to produce a biography which is accurate. Hopefully, what you do at a newspaper is accurate too, but occasionally you have [only] a piece of the story.

Scorup: What was it that got you into the media business and interested you in news? Maybe you grew up with the newspaper in your home…

Hughes: Oh, yeah. I grew up with newspapers in the home because in the time I lived in London, there were 5, 6, 7 big daily newspapers, but as a kid I wasn’t particularly interested in newspapers. But in high school, my masters [teachers] in chemistry and physics thought it would be a very good idea if I did not pursue a career in that direction, and by contrast, my master in English said “hey, you know, you really ought to get into newspapers, because you seem to have a flair for writing.”

Scorup: Speaking of schoolmasters, you’ve become one yourself—

Hughes: [laughter] I don’t know that I’m very good at it. I masquerade as being a professor.

Scorup: What do you think about that versus the other careers you’ve worked in?

Hughes: In the newspapers I’ve worked at, you’re probably not being involved with young journalists coming straight out of journalism school. Because of the size of that paper, you’ve probably told them to go away for a couple of years to work at a smaller newspaper, and then come back and try [working with] you. So most of the people working on the newspapers that I edited were fairly experienced. Obviously in journalism school, at a university, people are not experienced, although you have this wonderful opportunity here with the [Daily] Universe lab newspaper to learn something about newspapers and to practice. So I think it’s great. I think what I like about BYU is the interest of the journalism students in ethics, because we’ve had some bad guys—bad eggs—in journalism lately that plagiarized and made up stories and that’s given the profession a bad name. So I think it’s great that people from BYU who have the kind of background and ethics and principles that you do are going into the profession of journalism. Who better to reform it—if it needs reforming—than the people who treasure the kind of principles that you do?

Scorup: Sometimes I think the reporters get a bad rap for being sensationalist or dishonest or things like that. How much of that is fair, and since when have we seen that trend take place?

Hughes: Well, I think since Watergate, which is a big old scandal that shone a spotlight on the press more than it had been in the past. So what I think is that across the country, thousands of journalists are working conscientiously and honestly at their beats. [They are] covering city hall, covering the state legislature, covering activities in their areas—the news of which readers have to have because how are you going to make intelligent decisions about how to vote and how to live your life [and so on] without good information? Across the board, there are a huge number of journalists working probably longer than they should, probably not for the money they should get, very conscientiously. But, I think the competition between cable stations and the tabloids and traditional newspapers has caused, in some cases, a journalist to take shortcuts, or to rush into print with something that hasn’t been fully verified, and sadly, to rush into print—as we know from The New York Times and USA Today—with stories that were totally made up. I think those things create a bad impression across the board for other journalists, and I think those of us who feel very strongly about ethics and honesty and decency in journalism … are getting tarnished by the misdeeds of the guys who went off the track.

Scorup: Is there anything else you would want to tell me about media history involving your career or your experiences growing up?

Hughes: Well, it’s a great profession. If you have any talent, anybody should revel to get into [journalism]. You’re not going to make as much money as if you went to law school or medical school. I think it’s a great profession because newspapers—good newspapers—can be an incredibly constructive force for good in our communities and in our lives, and I think it’s a worthy profession to pursue.

Scorup: Thank you very much.

Hughes: You’re welcome. I hope it helps you.
Scorup: Yeah, I’m sure it will.

The Totem Pole

This is a totem pole.

One definition of a totem pole: "A pole or post that has been carved and painted with totems or figures, such as animals, that serve as the emblems of clans or families. Native Americans of the Pacific Northwest often erected these poles in front of their houses."

People sometimes refer to the corporate ladder as a totem pole. Example: "I would talk to the boss, but I have no chance of convincing him since I'm at the bottom of the totem pole."

So what's my point?

Look to the right side of this blog and you will see a photographic totem pole. Now if you're picture is at the bottom of the totem pole--or not there at all--you shouldn't be offended; every part of the pole is important to its existence. But I do think something special should always be at the top. Don't you?

Now is the time to make fun of myself

Well, gente, it's time to poke fun at the serious folks who promote backpack-wearing safety. Of course, I include myself in this group of select human beings.

Let me explain: earlier this month I walked into the newsroom for BYU's The Daily Universe. I just wanted to use a computer for a few minutes, but the powers that be saw I was dressed up (I had a presentation in class that day), so they said I could "model" a backpack for an upcoming Universe story about the crisis of heavy backpacks plaguing college students. Starved for media attention, I decided to sign up for the job--unpaid, of course--and let my photogeneity (am I making up words now?) shine.

Of course people from class or my intramural team or church mentioned they saw my picture in the paper. They said I was famous. They said I was doing the world a service by promoting awareness about a new issue, blah, blah (ok, no one really said that).

I even got e-mails from friends about the picture. Below are some quotes from them.

"Very nice Scorup! I could learn a thing or two from you!"

--Brad

"I didn't know you were an expert in the field of backpack safety"

--Tom

"I would not be surprised if you get calls wanting you to model for a back pack company"

--Mom

So there you have it, folks. The people have spoken.

Oh, yeah. The best/worst one of all is the caption that went with the photo:

"Sam Scorup demonstrates proper backpack-wearing techniques."

Whatever that means. The reporter told me the backpack shouldn't hang more than four inches below the waist. Good to know.

Photography 101: Learn the Basics

Even the greenest of photographers recognize there are techniques that make certain pictures more powerful than others. Most people, however, do not recognize what these characteristics are.

Mark Adams, a BYU graduate who has about two years of experience with photography, said lighting, risk taking and proper use of equipment are keys to good photography.

Lighting is important because objects can become shadowy if they are not properly lit. Taking pictures when the sun is starting to rise or set can be good for scenic photos because photographers can set up for the sunlight to be behind them, Adams said.

Lighting is often considered the most important element to good photography.

“If the light is not right, nothing else will be,” said Luciane Barros, who has shot photos for invitations and weddings and has taken photography classes.

The type of lighting needed depends on the situation and subjects of a photograph, Barros said. For example, the contrast and shadows for a pose in a serious picture would be different from the lighting in a picture of a laughing baby, which is different from the lighting for a picture of a landscape, Barros said. Light defines exactly what a photographer wants to show—mystery, joy and so on.

Adams suggested photographers avoid being shy with the camera. He said being willing to take many pictures can lead to some unexpected gems.

“Many times when you think something would look good in a photo, it looks terrible,” Adams said, “but, I’ll take the risk of wasting film on something that I wouldn’t expect to be good. These can turn out to be some of the best pictures.”

Tripods are important equipment for keeping pictures in the proper focus, Adams said. If the photographer doesn’t use equipment to keep the camera balanced, the slight shaking from the hand holding the camera can cause photos to come out blurry. Adams also takes several pictures of the same shot, playing with zoom levels, coloring and camera angles to find the best version of several similar photos.

Strobes, battery packs, umbrellas (to soften light), softboxes, external flash and studio backdrops are other equipment and features that can contribute to quality photography, Barros said.

The reasons for taking up photography vary from person to person. Preserving memories of special events, capturing images of unaware subjects and taking pictures of loved ones are all common purposes for photography.

BYU graduate Aisake Vuikadavu finds a level of comfort in the hobby and draws life lessons from the pictures he takes.

“It’s therapy; it’s like medication,” he said.

Vuikadavu said he enjoys looking at different elements of nature from a non-human perspective. For example, if he wants to imagine how a leaf or a rain drop looks to an ant, he lies low on the ground, looks up through the camera and takes a snapshot. He said people enjoy this type of photograph because it is a fresh idea many have never considered.

For Adams, who cited his father’s longtime interest of taking pictures of everyone and everything, the inspiration comes from nature.

Although the Provo residential areas don’t offer much in terms of scenic photography, other areas located farther from town, such as the mountains and Provo Canyon, make for some good photo opportunities, Adams said.

When asked why he picked up photography as a hobby, Adams said, “I saw nature and I thought it was so beautiful. I wanted to capture it and keep it for myself; I realized I could do that with a photograph.”

The benefits—and drawbacks—of citizen journalism

An independent style of reaching the masses is gaining steam and entering the mainstream. With the advent of new technology and new media, the phenomenon known as “citizen journalism” has been taken to a new level.

Without a newsroom, journalists, bloggers and mere citizens have become able to send their messages to the masses. There is debate with respect to the viability, accuracy and importance of citizen journalism. Although leading news stations, such as ABC and CBS, have reported on the rise of citizen media (Online NewsHour), many leaders of news organizations are still trying to figure out whether or not participatory journalism, as it is also called, is needed in their companies. These leaders are filled with “concern and a healthy skepticism” (Outing).

Accoring to an article on the Poynter Institute’s Web site, there are many layers of citizen journalism. The first steps are to open up to public comment and include citizen add-on reporters (Outing). For example, some news Web sites allow their readers to comment on the articles they read. These observations can shed light on topics that were not thoroughly covered or properly explained by the writers. Unfortunately, some news organizations don’t allow this because they feel they are giving up too much control to the readers (Outing, Dorroh). They forget that an Internet post can give birth to significant discussions that keep news stories and relevant subjects in the minds and conversations of the people.

One such example of “indymedia” took place in 1999 in Seattle. During this time, there were riots at World Trade Organization meetings held in the Northwest. Self-appointed journalists were taking the initiative to report what was going on. In doing so, they painted a very different picture from what the local media portrayed as anarchy (Social Tech). A group called the Independent Media Center was formed, helping change the way journalism is done today (Social Tech). While such groups generally have trouble maintaining an objective point of view, they also can provide worthy alternative points of view.

Another similar group, Backfence, started up in May 2005 (Dorroh). Building their own technology with about $100,000 they earned as consultants on similar projects for major media outlets, Mark Potts and Susan DeFife founded an "all local" citizen journalism company in the Washington, D.C., area (Dorroh). For a relatively cheap price, the technology employed by Potts and DeFife allows its users to post information and photos, and to edit the posts of other citizen journalists. In this way, their Web site is like a hybrid blog-wiki.

Overseas, the citizen journalism trend has also taken root. Within 24 hours of the London bombings, the BBC received about 20,000 e-mails and 1,000 photos from citizens trying to contribute to the news (Woullard).

Some folks wonder if we have taken the idea of “freedom of the press” too far. While I have extolled some of the virtues, such as accessibility, of citizen journalism, critics remain opposed to the practice. The downside of allowing average Joes to publish their ideas is the possible harm done to reputations due to faulty or “suspect” information (Coursey).

“I am not a big fan of the ‘citizen journalism’ being practiced on the Internet these days,” David Coursey of Publish.com wrote. “One of the tenets of ‘real’ journalism is that you don't distribute information that hasn't been checked. Citizen publishers are under no such obligation…”

Although corrections can be made to inaccurate posts, some readers or viewers may never see the corrections and assume the original story is true (Coursey). Besides, who wants to take the time to correct what Coursey calls “wacky Internet posts?”

There are pros and cons to citizens’ journalistic efforts. However, despite its drawbacks, the ability to get fresh and varied opinions and information make citizen journalism a significant part of media in the Information Age.

Welcome to the Blog!

Welcome to the Sam Scorup blog. It's a new site and has a limited number of features right now, but that will change. Take a look at some of the Web sites that I've posted links to. Also, you can scope out a couple of nice pictures. Thanks to everyone that helped with the photos and stuff. They're fantastic! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QC3FROWNSs

This blog is starting as an assignment for a class at BYU, but I'm hoping it turns out to be a fun project. I'm excited for it and I hope to be able to post some meaningful information and get some good discussion going on the site.

Feel free to read what I wrote about a hometown friend who plays on the BYU football team, the rise of international players in the NBA, and an article on the changes in marriage age among Latter-day Saints. The Keele article was published in the Tri-City Herald (you folks from home know this paper), and the other two were printed in BYU's The Daily Universe. However, here you can find the full text--not the cut-down, lame print versions. You know what that means--these versions are Sam Scorup exclusives, found only on this blog, baby! Consider yourselves lucky.

Que Dios los bendiga,
Sam