BLOGGING SCHMOGGING! by Camagwini Dolweni

So here's the deal, let me just put it out there: I don't take blogging as serious journalism. There's no pathos needed for that, its a fact. Finnish and klaar. I feel like this 'new media' journalism is watering down the fundamentals of pure journalism and it just not hot. The craft of journalism is to inform, entertain and be a social commentator of the world we are living in. It is not your personal diaryhttp://mushypeasontoast.blogspot.com/2006/03/worst-day-of-my-life.html or where you write about what you did 5 minutes ago (i.e Tweeter) or to be abused as a space for your own personal agenda. You want to push your agenda, talk to Noeleen or Oprah. New media journalists can claim that the print is becoming obsolete and with the changing times, it only inevitable for innovative ways of reporting to infiltrate. Granted. If you are actually reporting. How many South Africans have access to computers, let alone the Internet or how to even use it?? I take it not many, so as a result new media journalism is elitist journalism, that only the privileged majority have admittance to. If the news are for a small group of people, then what is the point? It is only going to circle the same crowd. How is that going to spark debates, fulfill the watchdog role or do any of the things it is really supposed to do other than be a plaything for the rich? The true quality of journalism has been trumped by the quantity of blogs, tweets, online papers and whatever else is bound to follow.

BATTLE OF THE TONGUES

"MIND YOUR LANGUAGE" says Nzimande

In order to adhere to government regulations, the University of Stellenbosch has introduced more courses taught in both English and Afrikaans, as opposed to the single medium of instruction being Afrikaans. Blade Nzimande has been quoted as saying this is a form of "covert racism"http:///www.mg.co.za/article/2009-10-05-a-deadly-war-of-languages. Is it really though? Is it so terrible that the University of Stellenbosch is using its constituitional right, by choosing one of the official eleven languages. The Afrikaaner race is a minority and could be said is dying out, so now that they are preserving their culture and language, its racist? Iam a young, black woman, so obviously Iam not being subjective in any way. I just feel that pulling the race card everytime white people want to do something to promote their culture its wrong? Iam aware that it tends to discriminate against non-Afrikaans speaking students that want to study at Stellenbosch, so is then that we don't have Xhosa Universities, Zulu and Tswana Universities? Why is it that English has to be the be-all and end-all of education? Our native languages are dying out, when people try to preserve them its perceived as racist? Am I missing something here, or is it because its white people? I'll have you know Mr. Nzimande Afrikaans is a native South African language and Afrikaaers are South African too.

Maybe Nzimande should mind his racial slurs!

Do nothing, win a Nobel Prize

By: Lara van Zyl

Newspapers, either in print or online, are currently reporting on the controversy surrounding President Barack Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize. News24 reported on former Nobel winner Jimmy Carter’s support for Obama. The New York Times focuses on the mixture of praise and doubt that Obama has received http://http//www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10nobel.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=the%20nobel%20peace%20prize&st=cse. It is well researched, written and structured, mentioning that Obama was chosen as the recipient for this prestigious award for, “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples”, this praise comes from the Noble committee for “creating a new climate in international politics” http://http//www.news24.com/Content/World/News/1073/d0dfe411ff374692b9807448a439e288/09-10-2009-09-31/Nobel_violence_prize_for_Obama. Obama has yet to accomplish great things. Forgive me, but the Nobel should be awarded to someone based on what they have achieved as opposed to what they have yet to achieve. The New York Times does not appear to be subjective, on the contrary, it is written in an objective manner – exploring the situation from different angles. The validity of the decision appears to be the primary source of the controversy. News24 http://http//www.news24.com/Content/World/News/1073/3f6c440b23b6407fbf4a0f24d203cb2a/15-10-2009-09-10/Carter_Obamas_Nobel_a_mix is less informative and only states that former President Jimmy Carter supports Obama because of the, “aggressive agenda that he is still working to fulfil”. The New Yorks Times reported the facts and sufficient information to their readers to enable them to decide whether Obama should or should not be praised. On a final note: what happens if Obama is unable to fulfil his aggressive agenda, would it not be an affirmation of what many critics are saying now?

On common ground

DRAMA IN MOTION

Stranger than fiction, better than reality

By Lara van Zyl

"You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist." The quote above is from one Friedrich Nietzsche, a quote that I believe in and one that I will forever harbour in my mind when creating news. There is of course exceptions to the rule like that little thing called grammar - I cannot have my way by creating sheer gibberish only to be subject to personnel surplus reduction in due time. The world is not in black and white, and when we start to realise that there are different people within the world whom believe in different things, whom have different lifestyles etcetera to that of our own, we might just realise that although there is room for debate whether journalism can still be entirely objective, I can still try. Media is a powerful tool used today for example, I never thought of being a journalist when I was younger - I wanted to be an Archaeologist. Why? I was influenced by the film "The Mummy" when I was eight because it was like so cool man and Archaeologists looked like Rachel Weisz, they could awaken the dead and because seeing is believing, I believed it. A friend once told me that those who have been judged, are the least likely to judge and I believe in what she said. All journalism students are here for a reason and it is not for the distorted version of college life portrayed in "American Pie" for one we actually do have work, we do get tired and we don't get laid half as much as we would like to nor are we desperate enough to chase such a thing. Journalists and journalism students share interlinked criteria for their reasons for becoming a journalist. I think that many can relate to mine - I have a desire to influence for good, but I am essentially the servant of the people and the idea of defending the rights of ordinary people is a dominating factor. The desire we, as journalism students, share for knowledge is overwhelming, but we need to cultivate the necessary skills and qualities in order to do so. I have an interest in life, a love of language, belief in equality and would never withhold any information to protect the so-called "fat cats" from scandal. With the ups come the downs, but ups outweigh the downs - journalism is hard work and it requires long hours, pesky deadlines and editors whom are always on your case are never fun, but humour yourself and remain professional, after all, editors are there to help you, so there is no need to lynch them.