Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Found a journal
Tom Kelleher, BarbaraM Miller (2006) Organizational Blogs and the Human Voice: Relational Strategies and Relational Outcomes Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11 (2) , 395–414
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Adding an rss feed
Sunday, February 17, 2008
iReport.com
Monday, February 4, 2008
linking practice
"Certainly, after 50 years, the unique historical value of these records outweighs any secrecy rationale," said Thomas S. Blanton, the director of the National Security Archive, which filed the petition, with support from more than a dozen scholars. The archive, based at George Washington University, is a nonprofit group that uses the Freedom of Information Act to challenge government secrecy.
Among the historians were John Lewis Gaddis, the Robert A. Lovett professor of military and naval history at Yale, and Ronald Radosh, adjunct senior fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington and past president of the Historians of American Communism.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Review of Chapter Two........ and that ryhmes
I personally thought the second chapter of We’re All Journalists Now was not nearly as good of a read as the first chapter. While the first chapter used current examples of what is being done by citizen journalist, the second chapter was like reading out of a mass comm. law book. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but is not the type of thing I like to find in a non-textbook.
In the second chapter Scott Gant gives you a rundown of the history of press and the first amendment. He talked about Justice Stewart’s opinion after the Branzburg case and how it was wrong. I would have to agree with Gant on how there is no way you can consider a shield for only organized media. It would leave the citizen journalist with no protection. The major problem I had with this chapter is how Gant seems to put all hope of a shield on the Supreme Court. It is obvious to me how the Supreme Court does not want to take on the responsibility of creating a common law in regards to the Press Clause. Gant only mentions Congress and I think it would be their job to make the law and then the Court can decide if it is constitutional or not. It should not be solely the Supreme Courts responsibility. They should be able to tweak the law to make it better.