Thursday, July 31, 2008
Summer Concert Reviews
Spiritualized 7/27 Terminal 5, New York
This show was great, and I really liked the venue. It was my first time in Terminal 5, but it was a great size with a hip setting with its bar on the side and balconies above a large open floor. Spiritualized came out with two female gospel singers along with the band, and they played some great, ambient music with moving vocals and music that just built up in a way that just made it all exciting. Also at this show, a girl wearing the same outfit as me.
John Williams and the Boston Pops 7/26 Tanglewood, Lenox, MA
This show was pretty rainy, and we were drenched on the lawn, but we were watching John Williams conduct his movie music, and it was amazing. He did a lot of stuff from Indiana Jones because of the summer release of the newest movie, but in the beginning, he played a medley of a bunch of his work, including the Star Wars theme. The Pops also played some music from Close Encounters with movie scenes shown on a screen. For the second half of the show, Steven Spielberg showed up and MCed it. It was pretty amazing. Then a few actresses from the Indiana Jones movies came out. Always a surprise at Tanglewood.
James Taylor 7/4 Tanglewood Music Center, Lenox, MA
This was like a Dave Matthews concert for older people and their families. I couldn't believe the surprises that came out of this show. Well, first, Tanglewood is a great place for a show because of its lawn and the audience's ability to bring in coolers and lawn chairs. Second, that made it perfect for the Fourth of July. Taylor played a bunch of his classics, like "You've Got a Friend," and he brought friends. First, John Travolta came out to wish him a happy birthday. Then, he brought out Yo-Yo Ma to play with him. Then Carole King came out and sang "A Natural Woman" and joined him on a few songs. Then the show ended with fireworks on the other side of the lawn. It was a fantastic night.
Daniel Johnston 6/19 Toad's Place, New Haven, CT
It was pretty exciting to see Daniel Johnston play at Toad's Place. Here's the thing: we saw him in NYC, and it was worth going down there, but Toad's Place is practically in my backyard, and I loved that he was there. There wasn't as much crying as at the last show I saw, but Johnston was perkier in general. He covered couple Beatles songs, which lifted the mood. While Johnston is very much indie and not very popular, his fans are devoted, and they love him because he writes a great song. Many bands cover his music, and it's easy to see why. His lyrics combine everything from hurt to disappointment to hope, and he does it all emotionally, and one can't help but feel or what to feel what he's feeling.
Dave Matthew's Band 6/14 Meadows, Hartford, CT
This show was rainy. It was also hard to find a parking space because of all the kids partying without intending on going to the show. Still, it was a pretty good show, and with how much Dave Matthews I've heard on the radio and around college, the show felt like a pilgrimage I had to make before I graduated.
Tom Petty, Steve Winwood 6/11 Meadows, or Dodge Music Center, Hartford, CT
This show was great. Tom Petty played all of his hits, which was everything I wanted to hear. He got the crowd in, and it was fantastic. Steve Winwood opened for Petty and played "Higher Love," which was a highlight for me, and he ended with "Gimme Some Lovin'," one of my favorite marching band stands tunes, which made me really happy.
Panic at the Disco, Motion City Soundtrack, The Hush Sound, Phantom Planet 5/10 Oakdale, or Chevrolet Theater, Wallingford, CT
Th main act was actually a bit unsettling. Formerly "Panic! at the Disco," the band dropped their "!" because of their new sound. They played their old punky, fast-paced jumpy, dancey songs, but they mixed in some of their new stuff, which is like an attempt at a Beatles-like, poppy, mellow rock sound. Even their stage setup with fake flower vines wrapping the microphones and psychedelic scenery paintings felt like a time travel. Panic!, yes, I'm keeping the "!" in referring to their old sound, was good at what they did. Their old music was different, and it appealed to the masses of tween and teenage girls in their plaid skirts and colorful knee socks. Their new stuff just didn't feel right following their old songs, and the new songs and the lead singer's demeanor felt arrogant, like they were saying, yeah, we got fans, yeah, we can play whatever we want, and you love us. They're just OK at imitating the Beatles, and they don't really come close. The girls still seemed to love them though - the text screen between acts said "SCREAM IF YOU THINK BRENDON'S HOT" about every five seconds.
On the brighter side, Phantom Planet closed their set with "California" and really tried to work up the crowd, and the Hush Sound played a short, but refreshing set of their happy, kind of quirky piano rock with beautiful vocals from both Greta Salpeter and Bob Morris. This wasn't my first time seeing Motion City Soundtrack, and they were just as energized as usual. They look like normal guys in their later twenties, not skinny skinny like other popular bands (Panic at the Disco, cough), and they make the crowd dance. Their lyrics bring the crowd back to their most embarrassing high school moments but remind them that they're not alone.
Blue Man Group 5/1 Mohegan Sun Casino
This was an awesome show. It was my first time at a Blue Man Group show, and I've heard for the longest time that I had to go to one. I hadn't heard much of the music before, so a lot of it was a surprise to me, a really good surprise. The group used a lot of audience interaction in "Rock Concert Movements" and just put on a crazy, colorful and fun show.
Bottling Up A Ton of Posts/NKOTB
It's been a pretty busy summer. What's funny is that while I feel like it's been busy, it really hasn't been. I've been interning part-time at the Hartford Courant in the Middletown Bureau. This is technically my last week, but I'm still working on a column answer and will be working a few shifts next week.
I've basically been hanging out and going to concerts in my free time. That's what I've wanted to blog about: these concerts. I'll give them one big post with separated bits about each concert.
And just so this post doesn't lack substance, I will comment on the New Kids on the Block recent radio single, "Summertime." When I first heard it, I thought it was Jesse McCartney or some new boy band. It was catchy, a happy summer jam, even if it was a bit unoriginal. I thought it kind of sampled "Bittersweet Symphony," which, itself, samples the Rolling Stones' "The Last Time" for its background. The name "Summertime," and the basic chorus of "I think about you in the summertime, and all the good times we had, baby," just seemed so gimmicky and put together for a sale. I couldn't understand how NKOTB, who are much older than teenagers thinking about girls in the summertime, could relate to this kind of bubblegum song. I also couldn't understand why they're back on tour - it's been a long time, and Jordan Knight and Joey McIntyre had a few singles after the band broke up. Donnie Wahlberg has a great career as an actor and producer. Maybe they just missed each other and the fame. They're back with an all-out tour and whole new album, and the radio's spinning their catchy tracks again. Good for them, hangin' tough. It seems that NKOTB want to sell themselves to us again, and actually, I'm kind of buying it.
I've basically been hanging out and going to concerts in my free time. That's what I've wanted to blog about: these concerts. I'll give them one big post with separated bits about each concert.
And just so this post doesn't lack substance, I will comment on the New Kids on the Block recent radio single, "Summertime." When I first heard it, I thought it was Jesse McCartney or some new boy band. It was catchy, a happy summer jam, even if it was a bit unoriginal. I thought it kind of sampled "Bittersweet Symphony," which, itself, samples the Rolling Stones' "The Last Time" for its background. The name "Summertime," and the basic chorus of "I think about you in the summertime, and all the good times we had, baby," just seemed so gimmicky and put together for a sale. I couldn't understand how NKOTB, who are much older than teenagers thinking about girls in the summertime, could relate to this kind of bubblegum song. I also couldn't understand why they're back on tour - it's been a long time, and Jordan Knight and Joey McIntyre had a few singles after the band broke up. Donnie Wahlberg has a great career as an actor and producer. Maybe they just missed each other and the fame. They're back with an all-out tour and whole new album, and the radio's spinning their catchy tracks again. Good for them, hangin' tough. It seems that NKOTB want to sell themselves to us again, and actually, I'm kind of buying it.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Archives and Ethical Issues
I wrote the police blotter for the Daily Campus for an entire year, and this, itself, brought up a few ethical issues with archives.
(Disclaimer: The last blotter of the year was done Monday, and I will not be writing the blotter next year. Also, I cannot tell anyone who the new blotter reporter is because we do not want anyone to harass him/her.)
My boyfriend, who knew that I wrote the blotter, brought up an interesting point last week. One of his friends complained about the Daily Campus Web site at lunch because she was in the police blotter a few months ago, and now, whenever she searches her name on Google or any other search engine, her arrest is the first item that shows up. The Daily Campus archives are online for years afterward, so that means that her arrest will also be posted for years. All arrests are online for everyone to see for years, even if charges were dropped.
This brings up many questions. Is this ethical? Should we remove past police blotters from our Web site? If a mistake happens online, does it make libel worse because it will be up for anyone to see for any amount of time? One the one hand, all arrests are public record - that's why local newspapers report them in a police blotter. Anyone can find these records if they ask for them at a police station, even years later after charges had been dropped. This doesn't make it different from a Web site. Also, if someone had something embarrassing published about them, they're just stuck with it online. On the other hand, if something is false, it may be libel, and if the web master and the libeled person are unaware of this, it can be up for a long time.
Slate documents this effect well in its article, "Don't blame the New York Times for your bad reputation." While I understand that libel is unethical and a strong case for a lawsuit, if something is true, it is not libel. If a person was arrested, it is on public record, and it's not the newspaper that ruined her reputation - it was the arrest. If something is simply embarrassing information, it has already been reported, so the damage has already been done, whether it was online or not. Anyone can also look up newspaper clippings at their local library. When they look up a newspaper clipping, they may not even look at the next day's, when there was a retraction or an apology.
I would say that the online medium of journalism helps protect from reporters from libel. They can issue a retraction and apology and just go back and change the story. Those in fear of ruining their reputations from online news should consider this and take responsibility for their actions.
(Disclaimer: The last blotter of the year was done Monday, and I will not be writing the blotter next year. Also, I cannot tell anyone who the new blotter reporter is because we do not want anyone to harass him/her.)
My boyfriend, who knew that I wrote the blotter, brought up an interesting point last week. One of his friends complained about the Daily Campus Web site at lunch because she was in the police blotter a few months ago, and now, whenever she searches her name on Google or any other search engine, her arrest is the first item that shows up. The Daily Campus archives are online for years afterward, so that means that her arrest will also be posted for years. All arrests are online for everyone to see for years, even if charges were dropped.
This brings up many questions. Is this ethical? Should we remove past police blotters from our Web site? If a mistake happens online, does it make libel worse because it will be up for anyone to see for any amount of time? One the one hand, all arrests are public record - that's why local newspapers report them in a police blotter. Anyone can find these records if they ask for them at a police station, even years later after charges had been dropped. This doesn't make it different from a Web site. Also, if someone had something embarrassing published about them, they're just stuck with it online. On the other hand, if something is false, it may be libel, and if the web master and the libeled person are unaware of this, it can be up for a long time.
Slate documents this effect well in its article, "Don't blame the New York Times for your bad reputation." While I understand that libel is unethical and a strong case for a lawsuit, if something is true, it is not libel. If a person was arrested, it is on public record, and it's not the newspaper that ruined her reputation - it was the arrest. If something is simply embarrassing information, it has already been reported, so the damage has already been done, whether it was online or not. Anyone can also look up newspaper clippings at their local library. When they look up a newspaper clipping, they may not even look at the next day's, when there was a retraction or an apology.
I would say that the online medium of journalism helps protect from reporters from libel. They can issue a retraction and apology and just go back and change the story. Those in fear of ruining their reputations from online news should consider this and take responsibility for their actions.
Flash Media
I am working on a slide show for my bio page on my home page. The flash effects we had to try are
1. Fade in effect (your future slide shows begin here)
2. Zoom in effect (yeah, enter the nascar)
3. Blur effect (easier than you thought)
4. Photo sideshow (now to the real thing, complete with a remote)
I didn't have much trouble doing it. Kodi posted some resources to help us, so I just followed the directions. First I had to open Flash 8.0 and start the slideshow template. The photos I used aren't that great, but they were the only ones I had. I think this addition shows a good representation of myself.
1. Fade in effect (your future slide shows begin here)
2. Zoom in effect (yeah, enter the nascar)
3. Blur effect (easier than you thought)
4. Photo sideshow (now to the real thing, complete with a remote)
I didn't have much trouble doing it. Kodi posted some resources to help us, so I just followed the directions. First I had to open Flash 8.0 and start the slideshow template. The photos I used aren't that great, but they were the only ones I had. I think this addition shows a good representation of myself.
Multimedia
Web sites use multimedia to better tell a story. In many cases, it works well. In some, it deters from the main objective of the story. Here are some reviews, using Mindy McAdams Chapter 2 advice.
Tornadoes Injure Hundreds in Virginia
This article, featured on AOL news includes the written article and also uses two slide shows of photos from a tornado and the ruins. It also has a video of the tornado. This is everything one could ask for when it comes to reporting a story. The slides change easily, and the multimedia is easy for a user to navigate. One criticism, however, is the way the page is laid out. I understand the ads on the side are necessary to pay for the site, but they take up a lot of space. The story begins with the article, then a slide show interrupts it. Then there's more article text, then another slide show. Then after more text, there's video. The user has to scroll down pretty far to get to the video, and because it's an interesting piece of multimedia, it should be easier to access. Also, the placement of the multimedia detracts from the article.
Madonnarama
I love Madonna, so I appreciated this article and the multimedia that went along with it. It was interesting because she hasn't been around in the media for a while, and she's making yet another comeback. Vanity Fair does a great job with multimedia as the magazine makes use of its photos. The article reads thoroughly with one photo in the middle. It doesn't detract from the article. It also gives a small photo that serves as an info box to bring the user to a slide show of Madonna photos from the 1980s to the present. The slide show itself is a great work of multimedia. The photos fade in and out well - there are many photos, and it shows a history of Madonna. Also, when the user brings the arrow to the side of the photo, the screen simulates a turning page. That is a really neat use of interactivity.
Time.com Multimedia Page
Time.com has a specific multimedia tab from its home page. From it, one can access great and interesting multimedia that, by themselves, serve as journalism.
One in particular, an interactive graphic on dictators, especially shows that point. This graphic shows where dictators go when they are in exile. When the user clicks on an X on the map, the rollover image shows a picture of the dictator, some information on him and an arrow that shows where he started as a dictator and points to where he moved to later. This type of multimedia takes research, and I like that it can stand alone as a piece of journalism.
Tornadoes Injure Hundreds in Virginia
This article, featured on AOL news includes the written article and also uses two slide shows of photos from a tornado and the ruins. It also has a video of the tornado. This is everything one could ask for when it comes to reporting a story. The slides change easily, and the multimedia is easy for a user to navigate. One criticism, however, is the way the page is laid out. I understand the ads on the side are necessary to pay for the site, but they take up a lot of space. The story begins with the article, then a slide show interrupts it. Then there's more article text, then another slide show. Then after more text, there's video. The user has to scroll down pretty far to get to the video, and because it's an interesting piece of multimedia, it should be easier to access. Also, the placement of the multimedia detracts from the article.
Madonnarama
I love Madonna, so I appreciated this article and the multimedia that went along with it. It was interesting because she hasn't been around in the media for a while, and she's making yet another comeback. Vanity Fair does a great job with multimedia as the magazine makes use of its photos. The article reads thoroughly with one photo in the middle. It doesn't detract from the article. It also gives a small photo that serves as an info box to bring the user to a slide show of Madonna photos from the 1980s to the present. The slide show itself is a great work of multimedia. The photos fade in and out well - there are many photos, and it shows a history of Madonna. Also, when the user brings the arrow to the side of the photo, the screen simulates a turning page. That is a really neat use of interactivity.
Time.com Multimedia Page
Time.com has a specific multimedia tab from its home page. From it, one can access great and interesting multimedia that, by themselves, serve as journalism.
One in particular, an interactive graphic on dictators, especially shows that point. This graphic shows where dictators go when they are in exile. When the user clicks on an X on the map, the rollover image shows a picture of the dictator, some information on him and an arrow that shows where he started as a dictator and points to where he moved to later. This type of multimedia takes research, and I like that it can stand alone as a piece of journalism.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Extra Web Behaviors
For this assignment, we have to show that we can do the following:
i) swap image ii) pop-up window iv) Play sound iv) Jump menus.
i) swap image ii) pop-up window iv) Play sound iv) Jump menus.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Web Is Not Print
Kodi and our guest speaker, Marie Shanahan of ctnow.com, are always saying that web is not print, and it's not.
One of the main differences is that it's interactive. Web users are interested not only in the story but what can prove the story. This means that they want audio feed, video clips and links. A simple print story cannot give you that. When writing for the Web, a reporter has to remember that users are constantly delineating from the story to read something else and keep stories short and to the point. They should also have interesting pictures and multi-media that relates to the story. They also have to write headlines that are search engine-friendly, meaning that it can be found through a search engine when a user types in key words. All of this is important, and it reflects a new type of on-the-go reader. This is what all readers are becoming, and news media has to cater to it to stay in business.
One of the main differences is that it's interactive. Web users are interested not only in the story but what can prove the story. This means that they want audio feed, video clips and links. A simple print story cannot give you that. When writing for the Web, a reporter has to remember that users are constantly delineating from the story to read something else and keep stories short and to the point. They should also have interesting pictures and multi-media that relates to the story. They also have to write headlines that are search engine-friendly, meaning that it can be found through a search engine when a user types in key words. All of this is important, and it reflects a new type of on-the-go reader. This is what all readers are becoming, and news media has to cater to it to stay in business.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)