Multi-Use

This is a piece that I worked on for my class on electronic news gathering. Initially I did not think it might relate to multi-ethnic reporting. However, as my classmates provided feedback during a class playback I realized that many of the tools used to gather this story are part of this course's belt.

The issue is a delicate one. In order to get the footage of the people smoking marijuana I first had to earn their trust. I called way in advance I clearly stated my intentions, "I just want to pick your brain about Florida laws on marijuana" was the line I used for almost everyone.

Before I forget I asked someone I knew and that trusted me to introduce me to this group of people since I had never seen them before.

The resistance was strong. "Don't film, just record sound" said Paola and her friends as I asked to go with them to talk during one of the 'smoking sessions'. So I resorted to my class training. I talked it out with them for a long 45 min. Kept the camera in the car and explained that I didn't planned to judge them, that my questions were based on pure curiosity and somewhat ignorance about why anyone would smoke pot.

I explained that I know that this issue is complex and that I wasn't about to understand it in one day but that I wanted their help in getting a clearer picture. I made sure my body language seemed sure but not fake.

When I worked on the story I tried to show all sides of the story and not just make it seem like there was a clear opinion on my part about whether or not weed should be legalized or not. I just reported on what was there and didn't tap into my stereotypes about potheads.

(Disclosure: I had a close family member that smoked pot and it messed up his life for a while. So I don't take this issue lightly)

By the end they didn't mind that I film just as long as I blurred their faces. They talked openly and even let me go with them to buy the pot. One of the girls even said she would gladly give me a sound-byte without the blurred face.

Should reporters always be conscious of race?

The first idea that comes to anyone’s mind when they think of a good journalist is their ability to inform the public in a balanced way without exposing his or her opinions. So, can the ideal journalist exist when it comes to race? I think that it cannot be denied that race plays a very important role on people’s lives in this country. 


In general people that are considered a minority find it easier to relate to those in their same 'race' when it comes to understanding their points of view or being sympathetic with their struggles. 


With journalism I think race is a difficult matter to avoid, sometimes we feel uncomfortable asking questions that would expose us as racist, other times when you are a reporter who is part of a minority (like me) people fear that they might hurt me by answering a question.

The thing that bothers me the most about the issue of reporting and race is the fact that it doesn’t become a “race thing” unless it is done by a minority. For example, the issue of school shootings and violence in schools has been a hot topic on the news for the past years, but I have seen that when reporting most of these mishaps the race issue is of race is not even mentioned unless it was a black thing, a Hispanic thing or any other minorities.

It is important to break the barriers of race in this country especially when it comes to news reporting. We can’t have Caucasians covering white stories, African-Americans covering their stories, Hispanics theirs and so on. We have to get passed that an be able to ask the uncomfortable questions. It is not a problem only this society has, in other countries the issue might be religion and not race or class system and not race. The important thing is that we have come a long way but still have to do a lot more, and it starts with having an open mind when we go out there especially as reporters.

Remember to be politically correct. Right?

As a kid, when I was first told it was important in this country to be politically correct I was not sure what they meant. I can’t say certain words because they sound like other words that are considered racial slurs? It was not easy getting used to use certain language. In this nation words that are considered non-PC or even racial slurs are very common as a sign of affection in other parts of the world.


Slurs have the power we ascribe to them, and it is very difficult to understand where and when we can use them without having a negative connotation. Some people have told me it is okay for me to use certain slurs that pertain to the Hispanic community because I’m part of it, but what would happen if I were afro-Latino does that mean I can use slurs that pertain to the African –American community as well? We get so caught up on the meaning of words that sometimes we miss the big picture. We are using words to further separate ourselves from other cultures, and we are too scared to talk about it because it might offend someone.


It is time to integrate ourselves, to forget the taboos that are sometimes associated with words. I am not saying we should ignore history or the negative connotation some words have had in the past, but if we keep prohibiting certain words or making them “politically incorrect” we will end up not being able to talk about anything controversial or refer to certain groups without offending someone. The fact that the meaning of words lies on the reception or interpretation of them makes it even more difficult. If we don’t try to change this it will become a cycle: yesterday's acceptable word will be today’s offensive word and it will have to be replaced by a different word and so on.

Fair and Balanced?

Juan Williams is the latest in a string of journalists fired over controversial remarks that might be out of line for many listeners. Williams stated at one of his regular appearances on the “O'Reilly Factor” that Muslims dressed in Muslim garb on planes made him nervous. Is this firing fair or are we simply being too sensitive? We do have to remember that among our first amendment rights we have the right to free speech. As a journalist, Williams practiced this right on a regular basis.


Some blame his constant participation in FOX News Channel for his inappropriate remarks, others say that he simply stated something most people think but are too afraid to say out loud because of possible repercussions or because they can be deemed racist.


Although I do think his comments were not appropriate, I don’t consider getting fired over them fair. NPR makes their case by explaining that they got angry emails and phone calls in response to Williams’ remarks and Alicia Shepard, NPR's ombudsman, even compares the amount of angry emails she got for Williams with other NPR personalities that have been controversial at times. I don’t think that should even be considered when deciding to fire someone from a position they have had for 10 years.

Things White People Just Can't Say

Food For Thought.

Office Party

This one is just for thought.

Listening Post Lectures 1

Let me start out by apologizing for the language. The reason why I could not resist posting this video is due to its relevance to class and shock value. Our recent discussions in class about body language pointed to being confident but careful during our listening post assignments. To be as mindful of our body language as we are of our questions. 

Prof. Reisner commented that when a person enters a place with an insecure attitude, unsure body language, or isn't dressed properly for the occasion you draw the wrong kind of attention. "People smell fear" said Reisner.  However, this 'confidence' had to be built. 

Based on what I've gathered the way to do it includes: research, an open mind, honest curiosity, confident stature and clear sense of purpose.  

Research in its current student definition is to go online and google-ing it. For this type of assignment that is not enough. You have to look into the community that congregates there. Look at what are their issues, their history, what brings them together and why. Luis, a classmate, mentioned that going to the establishments around it beforehand might help ease the nerves. All this is part of research.

An open mind is probably as crucial as the research. You have to be understanding, not pitiful. Be susceptible to their stories, put yourself in their shoes. Be conscious that they are just like you; Human. 

Curiosity is good but you have to display it in an honest and respectful way. Never assume anyone's reality before asking. If something crossed your mind put it in the context of your research, your own personal experience or lack there of. Never assume that you'll offend them if you ask. Just be natural about your question, be conversational. Be observational, listen to the background music, look at the city it's in, look at the way people approach each other, the language they use (profanity, lingo, etc.). Look for contradictions within the establishment and the people and/or the people themselves.

All these steps will help you have confidence. Walk in with a plan. You don't have to plan out the entire visit but at least have in mind who's the first person you want to talk to. Dress properly and don't be afraid of being looked at differently. Go to the level of the people with which you are interacting but don't be condescending. 

I post this with the intention of having everyone add to it. Post your comments and lets make a manual for our future visits.

Rick Sanchez's Meltdown on Sirius Radio

Rick Sanchez

"I think Jon Stewart’s a bigot" followed by "I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart" said Rick Sanchez,52, 6 year employee of CNN.

The overly flamboyant anchor of Rick's List on CNN and Miami native got fired after an ethnic offense towards the Jewish community. He has been in difficult situations before but has managed very well.

However there are doubts about a new revival of his career. Many think this last stunt makes him radioactive and no network executive will deal with that. Sanchez unemployment is most likely due to remarks he made during a satellite radio interview about being a victim to prejudice towards hispanic among the Jewish executives. 


The declarations were  also strong-handed against Comedy Central comedian John Stewart, a jewish men, who he called a bigot. The declarations are surprising given the fact that Sanchez should know that this are very sensitive issues for which there are a hurtful histories among both the hispanic and jewish communities.  He does have a history of getting in trouble.


In Miami he got caught during an FBI investigation of accepting financial favors from a Hialeah politician. Sanchez's racist remarks fell on the shoulders of a new president executive at CNN. This is the same channel that is trying to eliminate any 'drama' in the news room, an understandable move from a company that has dropped 40 percent in the ratings since 2009. 


Sanchez became part of the new CNN programming reshuffling. Campbell Brown came and went; Lou Dobbs was finally forced out; Larry King at long last retired.  
_________________________________________________________________________
MY OPINION


This is something that many people think "the whole jews-control-the-world thing."

It belongs in 1945 and has no place in today's world. If he has an insecurity complex that's his own doing and should not be dealt with in public. Everyone has stereotypes but he has to understand how to deal with them. If he says something he better have proof to back it up. He didn't back it up. Then again it's Rick Sanchez "Mr. Channel 7." The same man who revived this station after it moved towards sensationalism.

I think he will end up in a nice job in FOX news network soon enough. Why? because he fits their style of "journalism". Too much.

Wish him the best luck, but he needs to deal with his stereotypes by getting informed. Sanchez back your mouth diarrhea with facts; I'm sure he wont get in trouble again if he facts check this.

Your Data Suggest a Slight Automatic Preference for European American.

I've come to respect these type of socio-analitic test; however, these result are disheartening.

The test answered my, "am I racist?" question in a very polite form. Slightly. I found that amusing. I've never considered myself racist, but then again neither do most people. 

If I were to redefine the terminology of the result given to me I would say "you feel slightly uncomfortable by a culture very unlike yours." Here is why.

In my native country (Venezuela)  and in my personal experience I've found that the color is not what people have prejudice about. In Venezuela, if you are calling a person over and you don't know their name but are in good enough terms you call them by whatever makes that person stand out to you. For example: if a men is very white and blonde, they are called "catires" (blondee) ; if they have light eyes "tigre"(tiger); if its an old person "viejo" (old) and if they are black(negro).  In other words the "racist" thinking was never labelled as such during my upbringing. Only when I arrived to the U.S. did I notice that does words I heard people call each other where labelled racism and were "politically incorrect."

However, this long explanation is not to excuse my results but to explain what the results mean to me. 

So the Venezuelan negro is not the same as the American negro. When I saw the test label before I took it my  frame of mind changed from black and white preference to European and African (there is a difference). The geographical reference made me think of slavery but when I was going through the test I could not refer back to that thought since the answers had to be quick and almost subconscious. 

The key to my answers are in my subconscious, which is built on many hours of TV and short handed encounters with the African American culture. But if the test titled would have been in spanish and said "Preferencia entre blancos y negros" (preference between white or blacks) I dare say the result would have been different. My frame of mind would have switched over to the definitions of those two words in Venezuela and the subconscious reaction would have been different.

The issue was to analyze the test and what it does to you. In my case there are a complex combinations of variables that I think might have affected the results. 

At a less personal view we find that I'm not minority in the results gathered but rather in the moderate group. I make a conscious effort to be informed and as open minded as possible since, after all, I live in south Florida. I think that exposure to different cultures is what kept me from being placed in the "strong automatic preference for white people" category.