Harvesting News & Information
News is an ubiquitous entity. I can watch TV, read the newspaper, or go online. I can access blogs, websites, and television shows that don’t necessarily provide news but give information with an analysis or opinion.
I gather information about a lot of topics through many media. When I am getting ready in the morning, I turn on local news shows NY1 and News12 Westchester. Both tape half hour segments that are constantly repeated until the next edition. This way, I can get pertinent local news in a short period of time.
On the train ride to school or work, I can read a newspaper, usually the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal for their national and international perspectives and reporting – I am especially interested in stories about Israel and the Middle East – and their op-eds. While not news, op-ed columnists provide an interesting perspective on current events and they make me think. In the past year, any articles having to do with the economy or health care have also piqued my interest.
The rest of the day, when I am on my computer, I browse Google Reader, reddit.com, and digg.com for articles about specific topics. For technology news, I prefer CNet and Wired. For news about urban environmentalism, I read the Inhabitat blog. For news about Israel, I generally refer to Ha’Aretz or the Jerusalem Post.
For LGBT news I read the Advocate as well as a number of small blogs. For environmental news, I read EcoGeek and TreeHugger TreeHugger. For news about Africa, I refer to my Africa News subscription on Google Reader.
I also use Google News and Google Reader to find articles about national and international topics that may not have been covered in the Times or WSJ because of their partisan biases or space constraints or other reasoning that I may not know.
I used to watch major television news media when I was in high school, but I stopped once I got to college and realized how partisan they were. Now, I only watch them when something interesting is happening, like “breaking” or “late breaking” news with attention getting images. For example, when the riots in Tehran occurred after the election, my brother and I were glued to television, the Huffington Post live bloggers, Twitter, the Times because they seemed to have the best contact with people inside Tehran.
I am interested in what’s happening in a number of communities. For my physical communities, local news stations give me enough information to keep me covered. I do not keep informed about news at Hunter because I have never been very invested in the college, it was just a place to learn. My family is Israeli and I speak Hebrew fluently, so I am interested in news involving the Israeli community. I get as much news as possible online, but the most relevant information comes from conversations with Israeli friends and family.
I do not consider myself to be part of some communities though I want to know what’s happening in them. For example, I am engaged in LGBT advocacy but I do not consider myself to be part of the community. I used to work for the Indypendent http://www.indypendent.org/ , and I still read it. However, after working there, I realized that radical news does nothing for me, and I eschew radical publications. I am much more interested in environmental journalism and current events.
I get links from my friends and family through instant messages, e-mails and Facebook.
Despite all of my sources of information, I would still say that except for local news, I feel woefully uninformed about relevant news. All of the information in the world means nothing if you don’t have the time to read it. However, I resolved the issue with my new iTouch. I can access all the information mentioned above and save it onto the device to read at a later date. I can read the news at my own pace, even without the Internet.
I live in Briarwood, Queens. Residing between Kew Gardens, Forest Hills, and Jamaica, Briarwood is a largely Jewish neighborhood with low crime rates: Four murders, 86 assaults, and 340 burglaries in 2009. It is a clean with the streets and sidewalks rated at 98 percent acceptable cleanliness, and our parks rated at 90 percent.
Nine out of 10 students attend school daily, and more than 75 percent meet or exceed academic standards, according to My Neighborhood Statistics http://www.nyc.gov/html/ops/html/mns/my_stats.shtml courtesy of New York City. Heart disease is the leading factor in premature deaths at 20 percent, with cancer coming in a close second at 19 percent. However, nine out of 10 smokers in the area are trying to quit, and only 12 percent of residents are likely to smoke, which is lower than the citywide average of 18 percent.
The HIV rate in the area is low, with 52 out of 100,000 people being diagnosed in the past year. While this is similar to the citywide rate (55/100,000), it is much higher than the 30/100,000 rate for Queens overall. HIV related deaths have dropped more than 75 percent in the past decade.
Mental illness effects 1 out of 20 people. However, hospitalization for mental illness is much higher in the area than in Queens overall. Drug and alcohol related illnesses or death remain higher than the overall Queens average, but still lower than the citywide average.
More residents are getting screened for cancer since 2000, but cancer-related deaths have spiked in the same timeframe.
Babies are being born healthier and weighing more. Teenage birthrates are down.
Residents complain more about illegal parking (2.35 percent) than about disorderly youths (0.33 percent).
New York Times Public Editor Column, “The Other T-Word: Torture,” written by Clark Hoyt, published 12/08/2008. When terrorists murdered six and tortured more in a Jewish Center in Mumbai, the New York Times did not call it torture. Instead, it wrote that the victims were treated savagely. Readers complained, so Hoyt investigated.
He reported in his column that the reporters and editors had been in contact with Mumbai police, who had refused to classify the acts as torture. Hoyt argued that reporters had given details about the abuse, which conveyed the image of torture without using the word explicitly. Hoyt also explained that because there is a contentious public debate about torture, it is best not to imply bias by using the word when a journalist can convey the same image in other, less biased ways.
I have to agree with Hoyt. There are ways to describe a situation without using words that may have publicly negative connotations. There are times calling a spade a spade is necessary, but that’s not the job of a news organization, rather it is to provide the information. The only advantage that I see to using “torture” instead of “savage treatment” is space considerations.
And if the police themselves didn’t call it torture, it is not up to the New York Times to call it what it is.