We've heard accusations for years about the alleged bias of the "liberal news media." Professional journalists are trained to keep their own opinions out of their work, but in the broader (non-political) context of "liberal," having a liberal news media is good for everybody.
Read to find out why.
Showing posts with label radio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label radio. Show all posts
Saturday, August 1, 2020
Is the news media liberal? Yes, but not the way you think.
Labels:
1st Amendment,
activism,
communication,
conservatives,
critical thinking,
democrats,
election,
electronic media,
journalism,
marketing,
newsapers,
publication,
radio,
scientific method,
storytelling,
Trump
Friday, July 24, 2020
All Good Things 2: Accomplishments
On the occasion of my retirement, I have been thinking back over the past 16 years.
I have been the radio station advisor and Radio Workshop teacher for almost a third of the lifetime of KWSC-FM, which begins its 50th year this fall. When I inherited the station, it had a transmitter that was past its design lifetime, aging studio equipment, no AP service, bootlegged software on its production computers, and a programming automation system that somehow kept playing outdated things we tried time after time to remove. The station was also facing a $10,000 fine for FCC violations, committed before my time. One of the main things I was charged with when hired was to "get things under control."
Today, the station has a new tower and transmitter site, audio consoles with years left in their lifetimes, a constantly updated production music library, a constantly updated on-air music service, and an automation system that works effectively (except for occasional glitch caused by human learning curves). We have recently-purchased BluTooth sports remote equipment, recently-purchased standardized studio microphones, and we are using a podcasting platform that I researched and brought to the table. My partner in all of these technology updates was our engineer, Tom Schmitz.
I have also been a leader for many curriculum updates. What we now call "Electronic Media" was "Broadcasting' but the industry had moved beyond that "silo." Collaborating with Maureen Carrigg and Max McElwain, we updated the name of the major and began the ongoing process of converging the student media to make them multi-platform, as the industry expects. I also like to think that I helped find critical resources and the curriculum structure for the very popular digital film coursework of the "Hot Attic Film School", which is probably leading Mass Communication to a record enrollment, possibly as soon as this fall.
I have had multiple service roles at the school, including serving on the vital Academic Policies committee, the Institutional Review Board, chairing multiple hiring committees (they were all good hires), and some years ago chairing the Technology for Learning and Teaching (TLTC) committee as we revitalized it. I also served on the WSC Centennial Committee.
There was a time recently, due to unexpected faculty changes, in which I was the ONLY full-time faculty member in mass communication. I do believe that I was an important part of holding things together during that challenging time.
For the record, there are things at WSC that only I know how to do, particularly involving the radio station, and I say that literally. In anticipation of having Emeritus status, I am fully intending to assist and mentor whoever comes next teaching the classes that have been mine and in operating KWSC-FM.
I have been the radio station advisor and Radio Workshop teacher for almost a third of the lifetime of KWSC-FM, which begins its 50th year this fall. When I inherited the station, it had a transmitter that was past its design lifetime, aging studio equipment, no AP service, bootlegged software on its production computers, and a programming automation system that somehow kept playing outdated things we tried time after time to remove. The station was also facing a $10,000 fine for FCC violations, committed before my time. One of the main things I was charged with when hired was to "get things under control."
Today, the station has a new tower and transmitter site, audio consoles with years left in their lifetimes, a constantly updated production music library, a constantly updated on-air music service, and an automation system that works effectively (except for occasional glitch caused by human learning curves). We have recently-purchased BluTooth sports remote equipment, recently-purchased standardized studio microphones, and we are using a podcasting platform that I researched and brought to the table. My partner in all of these technology updates was our engineer, Tom Schmitz.
I have also been a leader for many curriculum updates. What we now call "Electronic Media" was "Broadcasting' but the industry had moved beyond that "silo." Collaborating with Maureen Carrigg and Max McElwain, we updated the name of the major and began the ongoing process of converging the student media to make them multi-platform, as the industry expects. I also like to think that I helped find critical resources and the curriculum structure for the very popular digital film coursework of the "Hot Attic Film School", which is probably leading Mass Communication to a record enrollment, possibly as soon as this fall.
I have had multiple service roles at the school, including serving on the vital Academic Policies committee, the Institutional Review Board, chairing multiple hiring committees (they were all good hires), and some years ago chairing the Technology for Learning and Teaching (TLTC) committee as we revitalized it. I also served on the WSC Centennial Committee.
There was a time recently, due to unexpected faculty changes, in which I was the ONLY full-time faculty member in mass communication. I do believe that I was an important part of holding things together during that challenging time.
For the record, there are things at WSC that only I know how to do, particularly involving the radio station, and I say that literally. In anticipation of having Emeritus status, I am fully intending to assist and mentor whoever comes next teaching the classes that have been mine and in operating KWSC-FM.
Labels:
academic,
communication,
education,
educational,
electronic media,
FCC,
leadership,
management,
radio
Wednesday, December 19, 2018
Time for a Change
I have stepped down from my Civil Air Patrol national staff position (volunteer staff) in the radio communications program.
Many of my social media friends are CAP members, but many around me know little about this part of my life.
![]() |
| General Amy Courter awards my first of two Distinguished Service Medals for my CAP Communications leadership |
My accomplishments (with the collaboration and leadership of many others) have included:
-- Front-line management of the VHF narrowband transition, a $5 million project that replaced over 500 repeaters around the country, often with volunteer installers, and has been called the single biggest CAP project since World War II
-- Advocating “if the national commander wants radio messages, then let’s SEND messages...” leading to the weekly Intercom messages that began the revitalization of CAP’s HF radio nets, and which in turn has opened up very cool new missions for CAP as a whole
-- Designing the innovative, multimedia Introductory Communication Users Training (ICUT) course, in an age when most training consisted of “look at these PowerPoint slides” (and too often still does)
-- Visioning and rewriting the communication management and operational procedure regulations every time since 2004, as well as multiple national communications plans…
Which collectively helped transform the communication system from a legacy relic of the 1980s to a vital 21st century operational mission resource…
Including, among many other things, bringing the NIMS/ICS “plain language” expectation for inter-agency radio traffic to the CAP voice operations manual, and incorporating after action reporting (AARs) as an expectation of CAP communications exercises.
-- Specialty Training Track test revisions multiple times since 2006, including transformation of the requirements from electronics orientation to management training, and changing the educational theory according to which test questions are structured
-- Saying “if the wings (states) are required to send in communication plans, we should be READING the plans and giving feedback”
-- Developing and implementing the 2011 transformation of CAP’s dormant Automatic Link Establishment (ALE) HF network to a nationally-managed vital communication asset
-- Planning and conducting the first national communications exercise in anyone’s memory a decade ago and three subsequent national exercises, before somebody else took of the exercise function
-- Oh, and then there was the time I got repeatedly threatened with being called to testify before Congress for an imagined failing of the comm system, which in reality was “a feature, not a bug”As I said, LOTS of other people were part of these accomplishments, including often taking ideas I voiced first and running with them, to great success.
I will still be around the national comm program, and may work on special projects. I also have other people in CAP actively recruiting me to work on national-level projects.
Labels:
CAP,
Civil Air Patrol,
communication,
education,
leadership,
radio
Sunday, April 22, 2018
Lost in Space; Lost in Science
The new Lost in Space from Netflix is an ambitious project with likable characters, but the show runners could have benefited considerably from a science adviser.
There are a few minor spoilers below about situations, but not about the characters or story line details (unless they have already been shown in trailers).
As in the original 1960s Lost in Space, the Robinson family is on a colonizing expedition to Alpha Centauri. This time, the Jupiter 2 is a landing craft from a larger vessel, which ends up in the wrong place and runs into trouble, requiring evacuation.
The production, based in Vancouver, uses beautiful locations and elaborate sets to produce an authentic feel. The characters are generally likable, although they have different and more complex family relationships than in the original Lost in Space.
At face value, it is an enjoyable season with nuanced characters, a complex villain, and good action sequences, partnered with thoughtful character development.
But time and again, I was taken out of the story by having to say "that's not right" or "it doesn't work that way" about things related to science.
Ice doesn't freeze that way
Early in the series, we see a lake freeze solid in an instant, causing problems for the characters. But water freezes at the surface first. Yes, the script established that it was really cold, but there is liquid water under the ice on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, not to mention probably at Pluto, which has been very cold for a long, long time. Ice freezes by forming a thin crust of ice, which slowly gets thicker and thicker.
There are other scenes (hinted at in the trailers) in which the Jupiter 2 is also stuck in ice, and the way the ice works in those scenes doesn't seem right, either.
Forests and critters don't grow that way
Like in the original Lost in Space, the planet the Robinsons are on is in a funny orbit that will cause it to get VERY hot and pretty much kill all life. At one point, a character notes that the trees only have one growth ring.
The life clearly has ways to recover, but the series was shot in a typical BRitish Columbia forest, with tree trunks several inches in diameter. You are telling me that the trees get that big in one growing season?
Plus we see several indigenous animals, some of which are very large. How do they survive the heat?
Oh, and in one scene, we see a fallen tree and stump that was clearly cut by a chainsaw.
Radio doesn't work that way
One of the main points of the overall story line is that part of the colony ship is still in orbit and and the remaining crew there is transmitting, but can not hear the landing craft on the planet, because the colony ship's dish antenna is missing. But if you know ANYTHING about radio, this breaks down.
A broken dish antenna WOULD prevent one from receiving, but it would also prevent one from transmitting, which they were doing just fine. Plus one would not use a big dish antenna for general coverage of the entire planet, which is what the folks in space wanted. Dish antennas are directional and the colony ship did not appear to be in a high enough orbit to be able to cover the entire planet with a tight beam dish antenna.
True, they could have been using a different omni-directional antenna to transmit, but such an antenna would also work fine for receiving signals from the surface. Astronauts on the International Space Station use five watt portable (handheld) radios to talk to ham radio operators on Earth, transmitting through a window and using nothing but the built-in antenna of a few inches long. Because of the altitude, and nothing in the way, it doesn't take much.
In addition, if the transmit antenna is not working right (or missing) the transmitter in the ship would not work right. The radio operators would realize immediately that they had an antenna problem. For purposes of talking to and from the planet, jury-rigging a replacement would not be at all hard.
Without this "the ship can't hear us" plot point, the entire rest of the story breaks down. It is clear from the dialog that the landing ships don't have the fuel to go back into space, to save themselves from the heat, but that if the colony ship could hear them, it would send down fuel.
So the whole rationale of the ten episode story arc breaks down.
Biofuel production doesn't work that way
At one point, the folks on the planet talk about using the biowaste (manure) from animals on the planet to create fuel to power their ships. I can't say much more, in order to avoid spoilers, but the plan is to produce huge amounts of fuel in a very short period of time, and I am not convinced that they can produce enough fuel to do what they want, starting from scratch, in the time available.
[Sigh]
I still liked the new Lost in Space and if they make a season 2, I will watch.
It has a rich production design, character-based scripts with lots of interesting character development. It generally does a nice job of promoting the "willing suspension of disbelief" that is needed in science fiction.....
Except for these troublesome "it doesn't work that way" problems with the science part of the science fiction that significantly undercuts the story arc of the series.
There are a few minor spoilers below about situations, but not about the characters or story line details (unless they have already been shown in trailers).
As in the original 1960s Lost in Space, the Robinson family is on a colonizing expedition to Alpha Centauri. This time, the Jupiter 2 is a landing craft from a larger vessel, which ends up in the wrong place and runs into trouble, requiring evacuation.
The production, based in Vancouver, uses beautiful locations and elaborate sets to produce an authentic feel. The characters are generally likable, although they have different and more complex family relationships than in the original Lost in Space.
At face value, it is an enjoyable season with nuanced characters, a complex villain, and good action sequences, partnered with thoughtful character development.
But time and again, I was taken out of the story by having to say "that's not right" or "it doesn't work that way" about things related to science.
Ice doesn't freeze that way
Early in the series, we see a lake freeze solid in an instant, causing problems for the characters. But water freezes at the surface first. Yes, the script established that it was really cold, but there is liquid water under the ice on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn, not to mention probably at Pluto, which has been very cold for a long, long time. Ice freezes by forming a thin crust of ice, which slowly gets thicker and thicker.
There are other scenes (hinted at in the trailers) in which the Jupiter 2 is also stuck in ice, and the way the ice works in those scenes doesn't seem right, either.
Forests and critters don't grow that way
Like in the original Lost in Space, the planet the Robinsons are on is in a funny orbit that will cause it to get VERY hot and pretty much kill all life. At one point, a character notes that the trees only have one growth ring.
The life clearly has ways to recover, but the series was shot in a typical BRitish Columbia forest, with tree trunks several inches in diameter. You are telling me that the trees get that big in one growing season?
Plus we see several indigenous animals, some of which are very large. How do they survive the heat?
Oh, and in one scene, we see a fallen tree and stump that was clearly cut by a chainsaw.
Radio doesn't work that way
One of the main points of the overall story line is that part of the colony ship is still in orbit and and the remaining crew there is transmitting, but can not hear the landing craft on the planet, because the colony ship's dish antenna is missing. But if you know ANYTHING about radio, this breaks down.
A broken dish antenna WOULD prevent one from receiving, but it would also prevent one from transmitting, which they were doing just fine. Plus one would not use a big dish antenna for general coverage of the entire planet, which is what the folks in space wanted. Dish antennas are directional and the colony ship did not appear to be in a high enough orbit to be able to cover the entire planet with a tight beam dish antenna.
True, they could have been using a different omni-directional antenna to transmit, but such an antenna would also work fine for receiving signals from the surface. Astronauts on the International Space Station use five watt portable (handheld) radios to talk to ham radio operators on Earth, transmitting through a window and using nothing but the built-in antenna of a few inches long. Because of the altitude, and nothing in the way, it doesn't take much.
In addition, if the transmit antenna is not working right (or missing) the transmitter in the ship would not work right. The radio operators would realize immediately that they had an antenna problem. For purposes of talking to and from the planet, jury-rigging a replacement would not be at all hard.
Without this "the ship can't hear us" plot point, the entire rest of the story breaks down. It is clear from the dialog that the landing ships don't have the fuel to go back into space, to save themselves from the heat, but that if the colony ship could hear them, it would send down fuel.
So the whole rationale of the ten episode story arc breaks down.
Biofuel production doesn't work that way
At one point, the folks on the planet talk about using the biowaste (manure) from animals on the planet to create fuel to power their ships. I can't say much more, in order to avoid spoilers, but the plan is to produce huge amounts of fuel in a very short period of time, and I am not convinced that they can produce enough fuel to do what they want, starting from scratch, in the time available.
[Sigh]
I still liked the new Lost in Space and if they make a season 2, I will watch.
It has a rich production design, character-based scripts with lots of interesting character development. It generally does a nice job of promoting the "willing suspension of disbelief" that is needed in science fiction.....
Except for these troublesome "it doesn't work that way" problems with the science part of the science fiction that significantly undercuts the story arc of the series.
Labels:
Astronomy,
communication,
critical thinking,
electronic media,
media,
radio,
science,
science fiction,
video
Saturday, October 28, 2017
Formula Scripts in TV and Movies
The growth of original series on streaming video services and cable has resulted in an explosion in the demand for scripts and "pitches" for series, not to mention movies, many of which never end up getting produced.Nevertheless, many of these scripts, as diverse as they are, follow the same basic formulas. One could argue that a "formula script" lacks creativity...but creativity actually resides in how new it feels, i.e. what is different, as opposed to what is similar to other uses of the formula.
Here are three storytelling formulas that we see over and over, including one that I consider to be particularly troubling:
1. The Hero's Journey.
In the 1940s, Joseph Campbell studied myths from many cultures (mostly Western) and found common elements. A young reluctant hero is called to a journey that takes him out of his ordinary experience and discovers a villain or threat to which he has a hidden connection. He has fellow travelers who help him as he is tested, and an older mentor. The older mentor is taken away, and the young hero most stand up to the villain alone, eventually triumphing and returning to his ordinary life.
Star Wars, Harry Potter, and Lord of the Rings are all basically this same "Hero's Journey" story. Even the original Die Hard movie used a lot of elements from this formula.
Because this formula is so familiar, writers use it all the time, or at least elements from it. The familiarity allows readers/listeners/viewers to easily engage in the story.
2. Save the Cat
Save the Cat! The Last Book on Screenwriting You’ll Ever Need by Blake Snyder
was published in 2005 and rapidly became the "bible" for many movie writers. Save the Cat software is even available to help writers structure their story to Snyder's sequence of "beats." If you know what to look for, you can find these "beats" in many movies and even TV shows.
At one level, Save the Cat is an interpretation of how to translate Joseph Campbell into visual storytelling terms. At another level, it allows writers to make use of the psychology of the audience in terms of primary and secondary (A & B) stories, major milestones in the plot, and pacing.
Follow those links and you may be surprised.
3. Dystopia
Dystopia is the opposite of Utopia. In dystopian stories, times are dark, there is little hope, and people are generally bad. Such stories are often set in the future, with totalitarian governments, dehumanized citizenry, rampant crime, and environmental disaster. Brave New World, 1984, and Lord of the Flies were dystopian, but in the last decade, we have been deluged by dystioian settings for movies, books, and TV shows. Sometimes the heroes are admirable, but sometimes not.
Science Fiction writer and futurist David Brin has call dystopian stories lazy, cliched, and cookie cutter. They are easy stories to tell, resonate with conspiracy theory and suspicion of authority, and they often do not require nuanced characters, which makes it a lot easier for the writers to create.
What does it mean?
The main goal of the movie, television, and publishing industries is to make money. To make money, they need to produce content that audiences will buy.
That is why so many stories today follow the Hero's Journey, Save the Cat and Dystopian structures. They resonate with people and gain acceptance more easily than some unusual storytelling approach, but to their foundation of familiarity.
The question media critics and even psychologists must ask is how these stories affect our psyches. The media has incredible power to influence people's perceptions and actions. Heroes, like Luke, Harry, and Frodo, may well subtly influence people to do what is right in the real world, not just what is easy.
But how about the modern dystopian orientation of story after story? Does it subtly influence people to see conspiracies everywhere, distrust authority, accept thoughtless ideology, and expect people to conform to the dictates of the perceived majority?
Waves of dystopian fiction usually come during times of social unrest and war. Brave New World, 1984, Fahrenheit 459, and Animal Farm all stemmed from the Cold War and deep concerns about communism. Today's stories are written against a background of seemingly endless war, unstoppable terrorism, and fake news.
This recent New Yorker article suggests that for every present-day dilemma, there is a dystopian novel to match it, and that the resulting "radical pessimism" has resulted in the unravelling of trust in science and the weakening of a commitment to political pluralism.
I think that dystopian story after dystopian DOES affect our national mood and makes "the ends justify the means" more and more acceptable, when it shouldn't be. So if the "heroes" are unlikable and do unethical things to each other, don't expect me to watch.
Labels:
business,
deception,
electronic media,
fake,
goals,
Hero's Journey,
Joseph Campbell,
media,
persuasion,
publication,
radio,
science,
science fiction,
television,
video
Thursday, August 3, 2017
Five things "Digital Natives" need in Educational Technology
Today's younger generation is considered to be "digital natives" because they havegrown up with Internet/mobile technology and are highly comfortable with it.
But what are the implications of that? Should educators really treat them differently?
According to this story, a recent academic study suggests that today's students are no better at information skills simply because they grew up in the digital era. It also finds evidence that “digital natives” are no better at multitasking than other age cohorts.
So, as a teacher, I wonder what this says about instructional technology (and here I am talking about systems that go beyond PPT slides and playing YouTube videos in class).
There is a lot of research that shows that, in general, students like using technology for schoolwork. In part, this is because they are already used to technology, and in part because it tends to lead classes away from boring lecture-memorization methodologies.
But I teach specialized technology, used for broadcasting. Many of my students are great users of the technology, but......
If there is a problem, many of them are stymied. Some of them cannot even explain what the problem is sufficiently for me to understand it, without going to look for myself (and then I can often solve the problem in two minutes).
Then there's the recurring problem of the students who save a file, and then cannot come back and find it again, because of lack of understanding of file folder structure. That should not be college-level curriculum!
So my take is that today's generation of students is sophisticated in USE of technology, but not necessarily in UNDERSTANDING how the technology works.
Again -- what are the implications?
- The technology used needs to be highly intuitive do it doesn't NEED figuring out.
- Students need ample instruction in how to use it (called "induction training"). As long as it is confucing or hard to use, it will reduce their motivation.
- Teachers need to use scaffolding -- giving high levels of technology support early, but gradually lessening the support to encourage students to become more independent and able to solve problems.
- As much as possible, the technology needs to be cross-platform, i.e. suitable tfor desktop computers, laptops, and smartphones. Of course, this is not always possible. My broadcasting assignments need to be done with professional hardware and software to be effective, not Garage Band. But for example, our school's Learning Management System (the only system allowed for online instruction) is just finally being updated this year to be friendly to mobile devices.
- Teachers need to guard against mobile devices as distractions in class. They can add to the classroom experience, such as for quick research during class discussion. But whenever a student blanks a screen or minimizes a window when the teacher walks up, you can bet that the device has been a distraction, not an learning aid. This can be challenging because students resent being told they cannot text message during class, etc.
I think that my particular Electronic Media program does a pretty good job of teaching the technology in a way that is not too intimidating and builds complexity step-by-step in reasonable increments. And we'll need to, because we have new hardware and software we'll need to start using the first week.
Labels:
college,
curriculum design,
education,
educational,
electronic media,
goals,
instructional design,
journalism,
leadership,
management,
media,
radio,
research,
television
Saturday, July 8, 2017
What most people don't understand about Social Media
We've seen several reports recently of popular social media sites that are struggling to be profitable, like Twitter and Tumblr. Profit? Most social media users see their accounts as a free service. What's going on?
Labels:
goals,
management,
media,
newsapers,
radio,
Social Media,
television
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



