1.  Tell me the story you watched.
2.  Tell me the advantages you see in telling the story by using video and stills the way he does.  What do you get that you wouldn't get by doing it otherwise?
3.  Tell me the disadvantages.  What's missing by combining video and stills the way he does?
4.  If you were asked (notice I said "if")to do your final project as one piece combining video and stills, how would your story be different? Could you cover both angles or one angle better in a 3-4 minute piece doing it the way Bill did it?  Would it be a better story? Could you be more creative? If so, how? If not, why not? Which way would better serve your viewers--two separate stories or one more like what Bill does?

I watched "Holt County Fair."  It seems to me that there's a big advantage in telling a story about a community event like this in both photos and video.  To me, the photos and the video serve different purposes: photos set the stage by emphasizing the tradition and (because the image doesn't move or change quickly) allow the viewer to dwell on the personal or situational characteristics of the county fair.  The still shots are also more aesthetically pleasing: they lend an element of art to the final product while the video gives the traditionalism established by the stills a sort of update.  Without the stills, the project would lack that element of currency.  The two complement one another quite nicely. 

The stills-video format used by Straw Hat Visuals is at an inherent disadvantage when they don't show the people they interview on camera.  As a viewer, I found myself wanting to see the person who was speaking.  I felt that this took away from the project quite a lot.  Had the transitions between stills and video not been pretty smooth, it could have been jarring for a viewer to switch periodically between the two.   

I think my final project would lend itself well to this still-video hybrid format.  Since the youth center that I'm doing it on has something of a history, I could use stills to show that, bringing the story to the current time-frame with interviews and videos of events. The project would be different in that it would integrate the two subjects--the history and the programs at the Key--into one coherent narrative, so I would imagine it would be longer and feel more comprehensive.  I think it would be more creative, because the stills tend to be more powerful than the video footage in storytelling.  Where the stills provide a certain history, the video could give it some life; making it look current rather than retrospective.  I think it might indeed be a better story as one story than as two separate ones.

1.  Watch a news story on a local 5 p.m. newscast (tell me what day and what station). Compare the broadcast version with the print version of the story that appears on the station Web site.  Is the Web version a transcription of the broadcast version? In what ways are they alike and in what ways do they differ?

2.  Look and and compare two local TV news Web sites.  How is video presented and organized online? Is it separate or combined with text only versions? How were the stories organized? By story or event? By relative important? By relative timeliness? By some other criterion? Which station did the better presentation of their video?  Why?

1. KSTP's 5 p.m. newscast featured a story about a new set of quarters that are to feature the 56 national parks. The 20-second piece that featured the reporter and a few graphics of the quarters, all that was announced was that the quarters were to come out, which five would be released first and how many would come out per year.  I think this was a smart move on their part: although everyone will see the new quarters, it's probably only a captivating story for coin-collecting audiences (or park aficionados, as in my case).  Online, KSTP chose to pull the story off of the wires from the Associated Press.  The two stories are alike in that the broadcast information was all included in the longer text-only story.  The AP's text story, however, goes into much more depth about how the success of the state quarters prompted the release of the parks quarters, as well as how the demand for quarters has been affected by the economy.  Even if the norm for broadcast Web sites is abbreviated stories, I wonder if this model a quick alert in broadcast, with a more in-depth online story won't continue for limited-interest stories like this one.  It's a serviceable way to report a story because the public can be made aware of the news item, and only those who want to know more about it have to learn the details.

2. At first glance, both KSTP and KARE's Web sites are quite different.  KSTP seems disorganized and busy, with stories and pictures everywhere.  It does, however, include a slideshow (almost looks like it was made in Sound Slides), which is useful in linking the viewer to videos corresponding to the slides.  Overall, I prefer KARE's cleaner Web site because it has news categories across the top--more like the newspaper sites I'm accustomed to.  It also has a more navigable list of top stories with video links.

KSTP presents their text stories alongside the video (which does not play automatically with the page load, thankfully) when the viewer clicks on a story.  I like this format better than KARE's method, which requires that the viewer click on either the video link or the story link.  Furthermore, when I clicked the "watch video" link, it took me to the story and NOT a video--there didn't seem to be video at all for many of the stories that purportedly had it.  For this reason, KSTP clearly had a better video presentation.  As organization is concerned, both KSTP and KARE have stories listed on their site by relative importance.  I think this is a good way to do it.  Since broadcast runs on a time budget, busy people watch TV newscasts to tell them the day's big stories.  I think that when people what a more comprehensive picture and a more in-depth understanding of the day's news, they look to newspapers and newspapers' Web sites.

1. Using the STRIB or PIONEER PRESS, choose a story from the front page of today's newspaper (print edition) (tell me the paper and date you
used). Then, using the Fisher Grid from the reading in chapter 4,
identify the dimensions of the story and which elements will work best
for online presentation of the story. Don't create a table to complete
this exercise.  Finally, close your eyes.  What did you see? Smell? Hear? Why did they do this story?

The Star Tribune had an story (March 12) about the federal court strike-down of a new bridge near Stillwater. 

Top 4-5 points of the story:

            1. Plans to build a new bridge over the St. Croix near Stillwater was blocked by a federal judge Thursday because it allegedly violated the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. (Txt)

            2. It is unclear what will happen next in the court process, however, it is suspected that the National Park Service may appeal the ruling. (Txt)

            3. The bridge that currently stands is heavily used, causing car back-ups--sometimes for miles--in the community of Stillwater during rush hour.  This has prompted environmental concerns over pollution caused by idling cars. (Vid or Pix)

            4. Washington County, the Sierra Club and other groups and interests have been fighting over the replacement of the old Stillwater lift bridge for 40 years. (Gfx--perhaps a timeline)

            5. At $668 million, the new bridge would have gone from Oak Park Heights, south of                           Stillwater, to Wisconsin highways near the Stillwater lift bridge. (Gfx--map)

Key interview sources:

            -Gary Kriesel, a Washington County commissioner (Vid)

            -Jim Rickard, Sierra Club Spokesman (Txt)

            -Todd Clarkowski, MnDOT engineer (Vid)

Key data points:

            -As many as 16,000 cars cross the Stillwater lift bridge daily.

            -Construction on the proposed bridge was scheduled for 2013.

            -The bridge construction could have employed 2,800 people.

            -From a proposed cost of $668 million, the cost of the bridge increases by $2 million each month construction is delayed past 2013, according to MnDOT.

Textbook Questions:

            I went to high school in Stillwater, so it's easy for me to put myself into this story.   It brings to sight, sound, smell and mind the river town on a summer night--which means high tourism, malts on main street, chatter and a LONG line of cars with angry drivers waiting to cross the bridge to Wisconsin.  The story focuses more on the data than on a characterization of Stillwater.  For that reason, I think the piece would benefit from a 75-second video sketch that characterizes Stillwater and assesses sides of the bridge issue.

            As for the Star Tribune's reasoning behind the story, the line-ups are a fact of life in Stillwater.  They have a huge impact on daily life in the community and I don't think a lot of people--myself included--go beyond the visible problem to understand the tug-of-war between the federal courts, the environmentalists and the county.  It's been going on for so long that everyone seems to ignore it, but there's still a lot at stake.  There are opposing sides to the issue, and each creates its own set of problems: If the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act's blocks the construction of the bridge, it exacerbates Stillwater's problem with long lines of idling cars--environmental and economic concerns that potentially hurt tourism.  The outcome of the bridge story has an impact on the Star Tribune's primary audience as well because the St. Croix feeds into the Mississippi.  St. Croix river towns' stewardship of the river therefore has a larger environmental and community impact.  That's why it's an important story.

1. Watch a TV newscast and then find the same story in the day's
national newspaper (New York TImes, USA Today). What differences do you
find in the use of names, attribution and other details? How does the
lead differ? Can you find a nut graf in either one?  Be sure to tell me which newscast and provide a text link to the national newspaper article.
1. Watch a TV newscast and then find the same story in the day's
national newspaper (New York TImes, USA Today). What differences do you
find in the use of names, attribution and other details? How does the
lead differ? Can you find a nut graf in either one?  Be sure to tell me which newscast and provide a text link to the national newspaper article.

            Michelle Obama is spearheading a campaign to end childhood obesity that includes an executive order committed to the campaign, signed on Tuesday.  The New York Times and  the 5 p.m. WCCO News both covered the story.

            The bulk of both stories' quotes came from from a "Let's Move" campaign press conference held by Michelle Obama.  While the New York Times did not explicitly say this, the quotes that appeared in their stories were the same ones run on WCCO.  As attribution goes, The New York Times had more of it because it had some history on the issue as well as policy details.  For WCCO, the main news event was the signage of the act itself, and not the background information that appeared in the New York Times.

            The lead in the WCCO broadcast could be considered a bare-bones version of the one in the New York Times.  Where WCCO announced the who/what/where/when quickly, the New York Times added some of the specifics--what would happen as a result of the executive order.

            The second graf in the print story is clearly the nut graf--it ties together the Michelle Obama star power aspect and the childhood obesity issue as it relates to the act.  In doing so, it tells the reader exactly what happened and why it's important.  The second thing WCCO anchor said had the same effect.  A shot of the signing of the act played over the anchor's voice, showing the viewer what happened.  I'm not surprised that their nut graf techniques were similar because it was highly effective.

1. Take a story from the Star Tribune, Pioneer Press or a local TV report
within the last week about a government or civic issue. Now, put
yourself in the position of a multimedia reporter. What parts of the
story would like to actually see? Hear? Read more about?

2. Outline those multimedia elements you believe increase your desire to see, hear, or read more about something. For instance, do you need a map to be able to tell where something is? Do you want to see or
hear those angry neighbors protesting a tax increase? Do you want
to actually read the parking law the city now says it will vigorously
enforce?

3. Identify a concept in Chapter 2 the author says that you agree or disagree with and then explain why you do or don't agree with it.

            The Star Tribune's Wednesday cover story was emphasized the personal loss of General Assistance Medical Care (GAMC) in profiles of low-income Minnesotans who will be switched to MinnesotaCare, a plan with caps on coverage and insurance premiums, on March 31.

            The story worked well in print. It put the reader in the place of the retired concrete worker and low-income cancer victim that it profiled with pictures and quotes, supplementing these personal aspects with the policy information that the reader needed to know to get a better understanding of the story.  In my opinion, however, the story could have packed more punches in broadcast.

            A major disadvantage of print is that, while the stories of these people are very compelling and well-told in the paper, it would effect me more to be able to step into the context of their situation by seeing their conditions first hand--the shelters and the subsidized housing, rather than reading about it.  I want to hear them tell their story to me--reading about is more like learning it through a mediator.  That's why I think this story would lend itself well to broadcast.

            I think that an unfortunate aspect about seeing this in broadcast would be the loss of some of the policy aspects.  For this reason, I think the ideal multimedia package for this story is an online article with videos of the interviews.  It could retain its informative aspects while giving people a personal context of the people who were profiled.

            I like it when multimedia news outlets supplement their stories with documents that increase my understanding of the issue at hand.  In the case of this story, the Star Tribune's website has a summary of notable GAMC facts in the sidebar to the right of the story.  After I read the story, this gave me a quick summary of its underpinnings.  

            I agree with the textbook authors that with the advent of online journalism, good graphics are becoming more important.  I agree that simplicity, clear attribution and the ability to stand alone are important components of story-accompanying graphics in order to boil down the important information for the readers.  Sometimes there seem to be graphics in stories that take more time to interpret than reading the story itself.  

by Greta Kaul

            Minnesota lawmakers rejected a Wisconsin tax reciprocity plan for 2010 Wednesday, according to the Star Tribune.

            Formerly, 80,000 commuting Wisconsin residents been able to file one tax return form for both states, the Winona Daily News said.  The states reimbursed one another afterward.

            Wisconsin offered to pay Minnesota $90 million, but Minnesota rejected the offer, calculating a $131 million boost in revenue by directly taxing Wisconsin residents who work in Minnesota, the Star Tribune said.

            Minnesota is currently in the midst of a $1.2 billion deficit.

            The current reciprocity arrangement will expire on Dec. 31.  Lawmakers are unlikely to agree upon a new plan by the time the old one expires, the Winona Daily News said.

            Interstate commuters are likely to pay income taxes in both states in 2010, according to the Winona Daily News.

by Greta Kaul

            Sarah Palin published an op-ed piece in the Washinton Post that urged President Barack Obama to boycott the climate change talks in Copenhangen Wednesday.

            The former governor of Alaska accused scientists at the University of East Anglia in Britain of manipulating data and destroying records in order to hide a global temperature decline.

            She said the "Climate-gate" e-mail scandal undermines the science behind the Copenhagen climate summit.

            "Policy should be based sound science, not politics," Palin said.

            Obama's withdrawal from the conference would be shocking, the Los Angeles Times said, as he has been in favor of the United States' re-entry into global climate change talks.

            Obama is expected to make an appearance at the Copenhagen conference's  end next week, the LA Times said.