Author: George Houde
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-hannah-pirate-14apr14,0,6438908.story?obref=outbrain
This is article was pretty straight-forward and kind of boring. It's about a man who was arrested for attempting to film the new Hannah Montana movie.The lead was sort of creative and it was followed by a more comprehensive nut graf. It had a good mix of quotes from various people, including the arrested man, the assistant state's attorney and a spokesperson for the Motion Picture's Assosication. I liked the ending because it was mildly comical....it's a quote from the man saying he didn't think he did anything wrong, even though thousands of copies of the movie were found in his home.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Eminem's back, and he's got a wood chipper
Author: Nara Schoenberg
Link:http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-090407-eminem-story,0,3082723.story
I'm a little iffy about this article because it doesn't really have any real reporting it seems. The article is about Eminem's new music video, which bashes a lot of current celebs. The reporter pretty much gave a short commentary on all the the people Eminem takes stabs at, then gives a quote of Eminem saying he was purposely trying to bash everyone and then ends by saying his new album is coming out soon. While the lone quote was a juicy one, it was lifted from MTV news. I wish there was more to the story, like reactions from other people, especially the celebs getting jabbed at. Overall, the story just felt like a waste of time.
Link:http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-090407-eminem-story,0,3082723.story
I'm a little iffy about this article because it doesn't really have any real reporting it seems. The article is about Eminem's new music video, which bashes a lot of current celebs. The reporter pretty much gave a short commentary on all the the people Eminem takes stabs at, then gives a quote of Eminem saying he was purposely trying to bash everyone and then ends by saying his new album is coming out soon. While the lone quote was a juicy one, it was lifted from MTV news. I wish there was more to the story, like reactions from other people, especially the celebs getting jabbed at. Overall, the story just felt like a waste of time.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Celebrities on Twitter: Real or fake?
Author: Scott Kleinberg
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-talk-chatapr06,0,1405201.story
So this article is pretty much just for humor purposes only, but I always enjoy reading these kinds of things. The reporter comments on whether or not celebrity Twitter posts are real or not. He goes through a couple of actual posts, gives some funny commentary on each, then decides whether or not the post is really by that celeb or by someone else. Here's an excerpt:
@johncmayer John Mayer
Original Tweet: I'm nice enough but I ramble on and on and on and on. And I blink a lot. And hard. Hard blinking, like full face blinking.
Translated: Jennifer Aniston just unfollowed me. I'd better call her. Or Tweet her. My eyes hurt.
Real or ghost: Real. You can't fake something so pathetic.
This article didn't really have any real reporting in it, but it was funny and it caught my interest, which is the ultimate goal right? And it was newsworthy....Twitter is the new fad right now. I think newspapers should include more of these kinda-pointless-but-made-me-crack-a-smile types of articles.
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-talk-chatapr06,0,1405201.story
So this article is pretty much just for humor purposes only, but I always enjoy reading these kinds of things. The reporter comments on whether or not celebrity Twitter posts are real or not. He goes through a couple of actual posts, gives some funny commentary on each, then decides whether or not the post is really by that celeb or by someone else. Here's an excerpt:
@johncmayer John Mayer
Original Tweet: I'm nice enough but I ramble on and on and on and on. And I blink a lot. And hard. Hard blinking, like full face blinking.
Translated: Jennifer Aniston just unfollowed me. I'd better call her. Or Tweet her. My eyes hurt.
Real or ghost: Real. You can't fake something so pathetic.
This article didn't really have any real reporting in it, but it was funny and it caught my interest, which is the ultimate goal right? And it was newsworthy....Twitter is the new fad right now. I think newspapers should include more of these kinda-pointless-but-made-me-crack-a-smile types of articles.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Ricky Gervais talks about what makes him laugh
Author: Kevin Pang
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-0331-gervais-qamar31,0,3662172.story
This story was a Q and A with Ricky Gervais ( a British comedian if you didn't know). It kind of gave me a sense of what a Q and A is supposed to look like, which will help for our next story coming up. One thing that was stressed to us was to stick to a specific theme while interviewing our professional journalists. This article definitely has that: it's all centered on Gervais' opinion on comedy. What makes something funny? What's the difference between American and British comedy? I can understand why it's important to stick to a theme, because otherwise there would be no flow to the piece and the reader would get confused and bored. One thing that I noticed that I never considered is that a lot of the times, the interviewer didn't even ask a question; he just made a statement and Gervais would expound upon it. (For example, "Your podcasts had set a Guinness record for most downloads. It seems as if you're enjoying these audio shows"). I think this works because it makes the story seem more conversational. People don't go around constantly grilling each other with questions. They say something, and then the other person responds. It also ended with a great, humorous quote from Gervais...I think it definitely "ended with a bang" like we talked about in lecture.
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-0331-gervais-qamar31,0,3662172.story
This story was a Q and A with Ricky Gervais ( a British comedian if you didn't know). It kind of gave me a sense of what a Q and A is supposed to look like, which will help for our next story coming up. One thing that was stressed to us was to stick to a specific theme while interviewing our professional journalists. This article definitely has that: it's all centered on Gervais' opinion on comedy. What makes something funny? What's the difference between American and British comedy? I can understand why it's important to stick to a theme, because otherwise there would be no flow to the piece and the reader would get confused and bored. One thing that I noticed that I never considered is that a lot of the times, the interviewer didn't even ask a question; he just made a statement and Gervais would expound upon it. (For example, "Your podcasts had set a Guinness record for most downloads. It seems as if you're enjoying these audio shows"). I think this works because it makes the story seem more conversational. People don't go around constantly grilling each other with questions. They say something, and then the other person responds. It also ended with a great, humorous quote from Gervais...I think it definitely "ended with a bang" like we talked about in lecture.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Why you shouldn't take kids to see 'Watchmen'
Author: Michael Phillips
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/movies/chi-0315-movie-violencemar15,0,4181994.story
This story was an opinion piece on the issue of violent movies and the kids who are watching them. Using the sensational new movie "Watchman" as an example, Phillips argues that many parents freak out about their kids seeing movies with bad language and sex, but don't blink an eye about letting them watch senseless violence. I thought the article was very effective because it used a current example that almost everyone has heard about to present an arguement for a larger issue. Phillips starts out by saying that no parent should bring their kids to see "Watchmen" and then gives several examples of some of the more violent scenes in the movie. He then compares it to other R rated movies that lots of parents wouldn't let their kids see just because they say the F word a few times. I think the reason I found this article to be effective was because Phillips used vivid, specific examples for every arguement he made. I hate when columnists rant and rave about some pet peeve of theirs and no where in the piece do they have anything to back it up (Michael Coulter from buzz *cough*). It's like "Ugh, people like this suck, blah blah blah, I hate them." In this article, the examples speak for themselves and the reader can actually relate to what the author is trying to say. I like being able to think, "He's right, it really doesn't make sense that 'Once' got the same rating as 'Saw V'" instead of just "Umm, yeah, I guess I know what he's talking about."
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/movies/chi-0315-movie-violencemar15,0,4181994.story
This story was an opinion piece on the issue of violent movies and the kids who are watching them. Using the sensational new movie "Watchman" as an example, Phillips argues that many parents freak out about their kids seeing movies with bad language and sex, but don't blink an eye about letting them watch senseless violence. I thought the article was very effective because it used a current example that almost everyone has heard about to present an arguement for a larger issue. Phillips starts out by saying that no parent should bring their kids to see "Watchmen" and then gives several examples of some of the more violent scenes in the movie. He then compares it to other R rated movies that lots of parents wouldn't let their kids see just because they say the F word a few times. I think the reason I found this article to be effective was because Phillips used vivid, specific examples for every arguement he made. I hate when columnists rant and rave about some pet peeve of theirs and no where in the piece do they have anything to back it up (Michael Coulter from buzz *cough*). It's like "Ugh, people like this suck, blah blah blah, I hate them." In this article, the examples speak for themselves and the reader can actually relate to what the author is trying to say. I like being able to think, "He's right, it really doesn't make sense that 'Once' got the same rating as 'Saw V'" instead of just "Umm, yeah, I guess I know what he's talking about."
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Vital Idol: The predictions
Author: Curt Wagner
Link: http://weblogs.redeyechicago.com/showpatrol/2009/03/vital-idol-the-predictions.html
This was more of a blog than an actual story but I love American Idol so I had to read it. It's pretty much just this guy's opinion of all the contestants and his predictions of what place they will finish in. He also includes comments from people's Twitters about the contestants. There really isn't any special reporting in this story; anyone who watches the show could do something just like this. But I think it's effective. Full-out stories aren't always the best way to present material. This was just a simple list of the contestants with a few sentences about each one. It was easy to read and, most importantly, to the point. Perfect for my quick dose of Idol before I head to the gym.
Link: http://weblogs.redeyechicago.com/showpatrol/2009/03/vital-idol-the-predictions.html
This was more of a blog than an actual story but I love American Idol so I had to read it. It's pretty much just this guy's opinion of all the contestants and his predictions of what place they will finish in. He also includes comments from people's Twitters about the contestants. There really isn't any special reporting in this story; anyone who watches the show could do something just like this. But I think it's effective. Full-out stories aren't always the best way to present material. This was just a simple list of the contestants with a few sentences about each one. It was easy to read and, most importantly, to the point. Perfect for my quick dose of Idol before I head to the gym.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Best guests bring some game: How to be a good talk show guest
Author: Steve Johnson
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/chi-0309-talkshow-guestsmar09,0,4552274.column
This article was sort of an explanatory piece on how to be a good talk show guest. It started out with an anecdote lead, describing a recent appearance by Steve Martin on the Colbert Report that the reporter thought was particularly entertaining. I think this lead worked well with this kind of piece. It definitely drew me in and made me want to read more about how to perfect the "art" of being a guest. My only problem with the article is that it seemed kind of disjointed. It went on to give more examples of guests who got it right, and then guests who got it wrong, including Joaquin Phoenix's recent Letterman appearance. Then it went into more guests who got it right. Only towards the end of the article did it say that the best guests are the ones who come prepared with something extra to entertain with. And the end seemed very random; it mentioned that on shows like the Colbert Report and The Daily Show, it's best to just let the host do all the entertaining. This seemed kind of irrelevant to the author's main point. Overall the article was an entertaining read and it was a good idea, I just wish it had more structure to it.
Link: http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/chi-0309-talkshow-guestsmar09,0,4552274.column
This article was sort of an explanatory piece on how to be a good talk show guest. It started out with an anecdote lead, describing a recent appearance by Steve Martin on the Colbert Report that the reporter thought was particularly entertaining. I think this lead worked well with this kind of piece. It definitely drew me in and made me want to read more about how to perfect the "art" of being a guest. My only problem with the article is that it seemed kind of disjointed. It went on to give more examples of guests who got it right, and then guests who got it wrong, including Joaquin Phoenix's recent Letterman appearance. Then it went into more guests who got it right. Only towards the end of the article did it say that the best guests are the ones who come prepared with something extra to entertain with. And the end seemed very random; it mentioned that on shows like the Colbert Report and The Daily Show, it's best to just let the host do all the entertaining. This seemed kind of irrelevant to the author's main point. Overall the article was an entertaining read and it was a good idea, I just wish it had more structure to it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
