James Keogh's MEDIA 211 Site - Spring 2018

In late 2014, reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely's article, “A Rape on Campus,” was published by Rolling Stone. In the months following its release, the accuracy of the information provided by Jackie, the main subject of Erdely's reporting, would come into question and be determined to be inaccurate. The article, along with Erdely's journalistic ability, would be discredited. This essay will look at the missteps Erdely made in her sourcing and verification processes by observing and critically analyzing the text of "A Rape on Campus, identifying and discussing potential red herrings within. I feel compelled to preface this essay by saying that I don't envy Erdley's position as a journalist and have serious misgivings as to questioning the account of a survivor of sexual assault. Erdley herself states that "studies indicate that false rape reports account for, at most, eight percent of reports." That said, Erdley has a responsibility to confirm the facts f...

On Sunday, August 13, 2017, Breitbart published an article by DOJ Correspondent Ian Mason and Deputy Political Editor Amanda House, “Alt-Right Activists Condemn Violence, Dispute Mainstream Account,” that covered the events in Charlottesville, VA, that had unfolded over that weekend. On the surface, Mason and House's reporting is not wildly dissimilar from the rest of the news cycle that pervaded that weekend in August. Despite the relatively basic facts, some of their decisions raise red flags. Specifically, the decisions that relate to their choice of sources and what information they have chosen to include or omit merit skepticism. This essay aims to examine those red flags and the implications they have. When I first encountered this article, I was immediately skeptical of what the authors were attempting to communicate. They begin by stating that “conflicts with mainstream media and politicians” (Mason and House) had emerged over the weekend, with mainstream media refusing to...

n February 16, 2018, special counsel Robert Mueller's indictments of 13 Russian agents for interference in the 2016 U.S. election became the focus of several news outlets. While each is working with the same sources of information (the 37-page indictment itself, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's Friday afternoon press conference, President Donald J. Trump's tweets in response to the news, etc.), this has not made for carbon copy articles across outlets. This essay will look at three news sources, specifically the left-leaning The Huffington Post, the centrist Reuters and the right-leaning Breitbart News, reporting on the indictments on Friday. The aim is to explore the similarities and the differences in these articles on the same topic, analyzing how those differences influence our understandings. The Huffington Post's reporting feels quickly feels leftist, with the headline "Robert Mueller Indicts 13 Russians, Details Foreign Efforts To Boost Trump, Harm...

I did not feel immediately ready to jump into this assignment after our first class. When I heard what we had to do, I felt anxiety about it straight out of the gate. “I still need to read the articles for my news based classes - what if there’s a pop-quiz? What if something comes up in the sidebar? I need to buy books and get prepped. What if I do a blackout on social media and one of the few bands I still like announces a tour and I can’t get tickets?” Feeling like I had to plan the blackout for the most convenient time seemed strange to me. Is the news that pervasive that I do not even realize when it is there? Well, the radio was on in the other room a day or two after. I overheard something I was not actively listening to, something to do with Brooklyn Nets signing somebody? I do not particularly care about sports; why would that information stick with me? A quick Google search shows that the trade deadline is tomorrow, February 8th. So, in that brief span of walking from the be...