Final Blog Post/ Analytic Memo

Last week was my last Independent Media class at Ithaca College. Throughout the whole semester, we’ve been discussing alternative media outlets that have worked to repair the holes in mainstream media. I think the most important thing we’ve learned is that journalists should be passionate about what they’re writing about because this will create the most thoughtful, transparent, and authentic work. 

For our final project, we were asked to come up with pitches for our own independent media outlet ideas. Students from my class stood up for five minutes and discussed ideas that were personal to them, and most importantly ideas they were passionate about. 

One idea that I found to be very interesting was my classmates website called riotgirlgamers.com. It was based on women’s role in the video game League of Legends. I’ve never played video games and I knew nothing about league of legends before her pitch but I immediately saw the potential for the site. I’ve always been a strong advocate of gender equality and this website does a good job at trying to achieve it. My classmate first discussed how women gamers are not as accepted as male gamers in League of Legends. They are often discriminated for their sex and sometimes even receive sexual threats. Riot girl gamers will work to repair women’s participation in the video game. It will distribute pieces about how to change the way viewers are seen and open up a platform for women to discuss instances they have experienced. I think it’s a good way to open up conversations and there is a specific audience that I’m sure will definitely visit the site as a way to connect to an emotional outlet that might help them through gender discrimination.

For my Independent Media class, my professor gave us our final project assignment: to come up with a startup for a journalistic outlet. When thinking about how to approach the assignment, I brainstormed all of my interests and thought about what kinds of websites I usually go to. Every morning I visit refinery29.com and Style.com as a way to have a relaxing morning. I read articles about fashion, food, and current events in the arts and fashion world. I also visit the New York Times to get a well rounded sense of the hard news of the day. I also have my own blog, a lookbook, dedicated to my interest for fashion. Lookbook is a website that anyone can be apart of. It features international bloggers who post photos of their outfits that day. Some become very invested in it, posting everyday and developing a large audience, while others who seldom post never seem to develop an audience. I’ve noticed something interesting about lookbook that seems to speak for the fashion industry.

Lookbook prides itself for featuring “street style.” This is a term used a lot to describe the styles of average people walking around on the street. Therefore “street style” implies spontaneity. The problem with lookbook and portraying “Street style” is that it doesn’t seem to be spontaneous. People take photos of themselves (or sometimes have professional photographers) take photos of them in an outfit they chose specifically for a new post. People don’t usually dress themselves with the intention of blogging their outfits of the day, making lookbook a problematic site for depicting street style. Most of the top bloggers are fashion experts and wear brand names.

I’ve always been really interested in street style because it’s where I find inspiration for my own style. I sit in coffee shops and glance over East Villagers wearing funky clothes. I think Tommy Ton does a good job at capturing street style because he goes around major fashion capitals and takes candid photographs of people’s outfits. However, Tommy Ton’s photographs are definitely more present during fashion week when fashionistas show off their couture and luxury brands.

I would love to create a blog that redefines street style and explore authentic street style world wide from people of different socioeconomic backgrounds. It might be interesting to create a photo based blog in which street style from different countries are posted, showing traditional clothing from various countries. I think Western culture tends to appropriate other cultural traditions without sufficient knowledge about them. It would be interesting to create a site that was grounded in a culture and educated its audience on how traditional clothing is actually worn in a country instead of how a Western culture might wear it.

Net Neutrality and Control of the Internet

I am about 16 years old and I’m on youtube trying to watch the Blue Lagoon. When I click on it, a disclaimer pops up. I need to be 18 years old to watch it. Of course I found another way to watch it, as curious teenagers often do. The film is about cousins who get lost at sea at a young age and learn how to live on a deserted beach. They live off natural resources and are completely oblivious of the civilized world that exists around them. They are also oblivious of their bodies as the female cousin experiences menstruation for the first time and as they both learn about their natural sexual urges when they have sex together for the first time.

To me, the disclaimer suggests that people under 18 should not be learning about their bodies or sex. I find this kind of censorship to be extremely problematic-- How can we not be given the right to see how our bodies work? The film is not violent. In fact, it is a beautiful exploration of how we were created. Thus, I am still confused as to why the film has been deemed inappropriate for minors. I find that this kind of censorship regarding the body and sex seems to be more prevalent in the United States. Sex is extremely taboo in this country and the body seems to be labeled “embarrassing.” Having traveled a lot, I’ve noticed how differently nakedness is treated in different countries. In America, children are told from a young age to cover up learning to call genitalia “private parts.” As they get older, the internet reinforces this sort of privateness. I don’t know in depth how other countries treat nakedness but I have noticed my friends from different countries seeming more relaxed and open about talking about the subject.

The internet is supposed to be democratic, meaning that all people should have equal access to it. But this is not the case. People are blocked from sites. The role of the internet as democratic is also threatened by the rejection of net neutrality. Deirdre Fulton’s article “Public Outrage Over Net Neutrality Proposal Causes FCC site to Crash” (http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/07/16/public-outrage-over-net-neutrality-proposal-causes-fcc-site-crash)  discusses the public’s anger over a proposal that would allow richer companies faster internet service. This kind of proposition is threatening to an open internet.

It seems as if the internet, once a useful resource to us, has begun to dictate us instead. Although we may choose what sites to go to, the internet controls what sites are more readily available and more efficient to use. Maybe we are unaware of the internet’s control over us.  

In La Romana, the sun weaves itself underneath my skin. It’s nearly 90 degrees and I forgot my water at home. I wipe the sweat off of my forehead and rummage through my bag to find my iphone to check the time. I wonder if I have any messages and ask my cousin Camila to turn on her hotspot. I’m connected and green bubbles dance around my screen: “hey,” “what are you doing today?” “Let’s meet at the beach at 5” and “What’s for lunch?” I am here, enclosed by the gates of the orphanage Fundación Niños y Niñas de Cristo, and I am also there, a resort in the heart of town that Junot Diaz likes to write about. “Any average asshole would love it here,” he writes in his novel This is How you Lose Her. He says this because it acts as its own country. People who go to Casa De Campo see more of the Dominican Republic when they drive there from the airport, even with the purple tinted windows of the taxi. Being Dominican and having traveled to the island each summer, I know enough about the Dominican Republic to know that Casa De Campo is by no means an accurate representation of the rest of the country. And I am active in reminding myself of this to break free from the illusion that the resort has created  with it’s man-made beach, endless lush golf courses, and oceanside villas. One way I do this is to visit the orphanage about 20 minutes away. It’s there that I talk to real Dominicans, who have nothing but big hearts. At the orphanage, the girls braid my hair and write me letters. When I take out my iphone or ipod to check the time, they are astonished. They know what it is but they haven’t handled one for large increments of time for themselves. I am somewhat envious of their oblivion. They are forced real social interaction as I resort to artificial platforms. But they have no choice but to live this way-- the internet is not available to the lower class.

In the article “FCC Flip-Flop could Turn the Internet into the Superhighway of the Rich,” by Juan Gonzalez (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/gonzalez-fcc-flip-flop-net-loss-article-1.1768404), the accessibility of the internet to different social classes is brought to light. The internet has become more of a commodity than a resource, with only larger corporations being able to afford it. Gonzalez states, “Once providers start to privilege some applications or website over others, then the smaller voices get squeezed out and we all lose,” (3). Gonzalez reveals how smaller businesses are not able to share their ideas to a wider public because they can’t afford fast internet. Websites with less money therefore have a slower internet connection than a website with more money. Consequentially, the internet has become a business. Gonzalez concludes, “It doesn’t need another high-priced athlete. It needs leaders who will fight to keep it free and open.” If internet prices dictate the kinds of ideas that are circulated, we must work hard to keep it as available and unbiased as possible.

The Drudge Report and the "Big Lie"

Independent media does not pretend to be objective or neutral. Therefore Independent media practices complete transparency. However, there are some sites that are not objective but still produce inaccurate stories. Matt Drudge for example, is infamous for his lack of factual information. However, mainstream media outlets still link to him. Although claiming that his information is 80% accurate, he still seems to have a hold over the mainstream. One of Drudge’s exclusives was about Bill Clinton fathering his love child. After this story was published, mainstream media went insane over the story, many not even bothering to fact check it. Yes, Drudge is partly to blame for an inaccurate story, but journalists should be skeptical, and in this story, skepticism was seriously lacking.

Has anybody ever told you something so extraordinary that you did not even bother to question it? You just believed it, thinking to yourself “This has to be true because why would anyone ever lie about that?” This idea is called “The Big Lie,” a concept that means that the bigger a lie is, the more someone is likely to believe it.

Now as I reflect on this concept of “the big lie” I look back at history and think about how the big lie has been used to brainwash so many people. Infamously used by Hitler to convince people that the Jewish race should be exterminated, another example relating to the news is Father Coughlin, a radical Roman Catholic priest who used the radio as a way to circulate his ideas regarding anti-semitism.  His ideas influenced the social and political landscape at the time (the 1920s and 1930s) because radio was becoming a part of everyday life. Father Coughlin stereotyped Jews and said they were “traffickers” in gold. He preyed on people’s emotions so that they would trust his words. He also blatantly said jews were communist. This was a time where people were really frightened of communism. This is an example of Father Coughlin using the big lie and fear to persuade people into believing him. Father Coughlin and this idea of the big lie is explained in Rodger Streitmatter’s Mightier Than the Sword in Chapter 8.

Furthermore, Father Coughlin’s radio talk show is an embarrassment to the journalism field. It does everything that a journalist should not do. Instead of educating the public, it used the public and deceived it. Although the Drudge Report is also to blame for inaccurate information, it does not try to deceive people into believing the information. Thus, The Drudge Report is transparent in its inaccuracies.

The SPJ Code of Ethics acts as a guideline for Journalists everywhere, mainstream or independent. With the rise of social media and “reporter” identities, it is common for people to question the validity of independent journalists. They measure a Journalists validity by their salary. A “professional” journalist gets a regular salary and does journalism as a career. The “independent” journalist does not receive a salary and a lot of the times has not received a traditional journalism education. But how can we measure a journalists worth by his or her salary? In fact, shouldn’t we question a journalists validity more, when they make a salary? More importantly we should measure a journalists validity based on his or her ability to follow the SPJ code of ethics.

If a Journalist’s practice is completely ethical than “validity” should be already granted. The SPJ code of Ethics is essentially its name: it is a code which lays out ethical rules every journalist should abide by. There are four main clauses: seek truth and report it, minimize harm, act independently, and be accountable and transparent. Within these there are bullet points that explain each concept further, providing examples and ethical dilemmas. For example, underneath “Seek Truth and Report it,” one bullet point reads, “Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information unless traditional, open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Of course, undercover work is important in the field of journalism. It is sometimes the only way to unveil an injustice that is being hidden from the public. Because the public has the right to know, journalists must take measures to unveil what is not being said. But this should always be done ethically.

When the clause refers to “surreptitious methods,” I automatically think of leading questions. A leading question is a question that already anticipates it’s answer. A simple example is asking: Why do you think that person is so horrible? Instead of just asking: What do you think about that person?

Now, for a more serious and political example, there is a video taken by a Citizen journalist saying that Vanity Fair writer Todd Purdum is  “sleazy,” “slimy,” and a “scumbag.” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/bill-clinton-purdhum-a-sl_b_104771.html) But he said this only because he trusted the person asking the question. Little did he know, the citizen journalist had wanted this kind of answer. Instead of asking: What did you think about the article? Or Do you have anything to say about the article? The journalist instead deceived Bill Clinton making him think she was on her side. She got a good story but the way she did this was unethical. A good journalist should still be able to get a good story by covering an event ethically.

During a conversation about YouTube, a classmate in my Independent Media class today started to reflect on how people are talking about journalism is a dying field. She then said something very powerful: “It’s not dying, it’s just changing.” Change is something crucial to the journalism field. As the world changes, journalism must also change, rendering the way it tells news with the rise of new technologies, especially social media.

Although social media doesn’t always tell hard news, it offers viewers a space to engage in current events in a more casual way, a way that might be less intimidating than picking up a newspaper.

Michael Buckley is a self-taught host of his own youtube channel called “What the Buck?” His role in youtube is discussed in the New York Times article by Brian Stelter “YouTube videos Pull in Real Money.” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/business/media/11youtube.html?_r=0)

Buckley’s show, described as being “silly,” revolves around Celebrity gossip and it airs three times a week. He initially started the show for the web, but it expanded with YouTube’s help, receiving 100 million views.

YouTube is extremely popular today. People go on the site to pass time. I think what makes Buckley’s channel so successful is his personality and his content. Our generation has a sick fascination with celebrity gossip. For some reason, we enjoy learning about people we don’t know. We marvel at their luxurious lives, living vicariously through them. Buckley delivers his celebrity news in an energetic manner. He speaks incredibly fast and engages the viewer/listener directly. Consequentially, no matter how irritating Buckley’s videos can be, he automatically draws the audience in.

Although Buckley isn’t reporting on news that may be crucial to the average person, he should be an inspiration to independent journalists. According to Brian Stelter’s article, he started his YouTube channel with a $2,000 canon camera, a $6 piece of fabric for a backdrop, and some work lights. Additionally, he spent 40 hours a week on YouTube before he received compensation. This shows how much of a sacrifice the channel initially was. Unlike mainstream media journalists, who probably rely on their regular salaries, the independent journalist does not treat news as a commodity. The Independent Journalist thrives on pure passion for the subject matter. YouTube helps journalists to embody this passion, sometimes transforming their hobbies into a successful business.

How many times do we use google a day? We don’t keep count, for we use it too many times to keep track of. What do we use google for? Just about everything. Google represents a sort of vast, mysterious abyss. It has the answers to everything we want to know. We don’t normally think of the power google has but the article “Journalist Who Exposes U.N. Corruption Disappears from Google” reveals google’s extraordinary control over information.

The article discusses Journalist Matthew Lee. His style is described as “clunky,” his methods as “unorthodox” and his judgment as “off the mark.” However, In the past, Lee has been a whistleblower for the U.N. He has helped in unveiling human-rights abuse by the Ugandan People’s Defense Force.

Lee was surprised when he received an email from google, after google allegedly received a complaint from a source about Lee’s small website. The assumption is that the UNDP sent the complaints. What’s strange is that after two years, this was the first time Lee was receiving complaints. Although Lee had helped the UN in the past, as a journalist, he was naturally also skeptical of the UN itself. He found that in November of 2007 the UN had not signed global human-rights and anti-censorship compacts. He questioned why they had not done this. This was not taken well by the UN.  Lee states,

"I've been covering ... U.N. stories, three to four a day, for two years, and for the last two years there's been no problem at all… Then that Friday, I received the e-mail. There's something a little skeezy here. I think that Google got involved with the U.N. on these Millennium goals and thought, this is the United Nations, if they tell you some small Web site is a thorn in their side and there's a credible reason you could remove them from your news service, you do it."

Lee’s quotation revealed how google is able to control journalism. In my last blog post I also spoke about how Jacobson had to leave google, fearing its power over his identity as a liberated and independent journalist. It’s interesting because the UN seems to be acting like complete hypocrites. They respect Lee when he’s a whistleblower in their favor, but as soon as he steps out and is critical of them, they dismiss him. Why can’t organizations accept criticism if it will make them a more ethical organization in the long run?

As I came across the article “Senator’s Attempt to Define ‘Real Journalism’ Blasted by Journalists”

(http://www.commondreams.org/news/2013/08/02/senators-attempt-define-real-journalism-blasted-journalists)

I was struck by the phrase “Real Journalism.” I began to think: If there is a real journalism, is there a fake journalism? Who defines what is journalism and what is not? And then I re-read the article’s title: Senator’s Attempt to Define Real Journalism… Then I thought how can you define journalism? And what gives a senator, somebody who is not a journalist, the power to do this?

So I read the entire article, not knowing what I was getting myself into. Here’s a summary of the article: Senator Dianne Feinstein says the shield law protecting the press should only be given to real journalists. She defines a real journalist as somebody who has a salary for a journalism career. Here I challenge the senator: A journalist, by nature, should not be driven by compensation. A journalists true passion should be to seek truth and report it. In the SPJ code of ethics, the rule of ethics do not only apply only to journalists who are getting paid. By tying journalism to money, Feinstein is suggesting that news is a commodity. This is a very troubling idea because when news becomes dictated by money it is no longer news. And a journalist’s ability to report the news should not be determined by his/her paycheck.

Senator Charles Schumer makes an interesting statement challenging Feinstein’s definition of real journalism. He states, “The world has changed. We’re very careful in this bill to distinguish journalists from those who shouldn’t be protected, WikiLeaks and all those, and we’ve ensured that...But there are people who write and do real journalism, in different ways than we’re used to. They should not be excluded from this bill."

Schumer understands that we live in a world that is constantly changing, especially in terms of technology. Now everybody is able to make a blog and report on corruptions in the world. In a way we are all journalists, but of course, not everybody can be awarded a press pass. But Dianne Feinstein completely disregards the importance of independent journalists. She is stuck in the past and refuses to open her eyes to new media and the evolving identities of journalists.

On March 24th, William A. Jacobson was invited to my Independent Media Journalism class at Ithaca College. Just to briefly summarize the class, it is devoted to exploring independent media outlets that are not tied to conglomerate companies. Independent Media outlets have the liberty to explore their own voice without fear of being punished by their employers or ridiculed by the public. An independent journalist knows that his/her opinion may not be respected by everybody-- but they still choose to publish it, encouraging debates and conversation.

Most recently we’ve been discussing bloggers, independent journalists who focus on a niche that they feel passionate about. I’ve always wanted to be a fashion blogger. In middle school I created a lookbook (http://lookbook.nu/Gabbyj) where I posted outfits. I didn’t do it frequently enough and overtime I lost interest. I’ve been wanting to get back into the habit of it, but it’s taken me awhile. It’s not difficult, I just have to take photos of what I’m wearing in some kind of creative way, but something keeps holding me back. I sometimes fear that I’ll create an unsuccessful blog. As a perfectionist, I have a plan for everything. But a blog is something that can’t be so thoroughly planned. It’s a changing medium, changing with the writer and with the world.

Jacobson gave me confidence that anybody could create a successful blog with the right mindset. He started his conservative political blog: Legal Insurrection in 2008. (http://legalinsurrection.com/.) The blog started with a conversation. He was explaining his reasons for voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin in the 2008 presidential election. The person he was speaking to was voting for Obama, but said that Jacobson’s argument was very persuasive. He gave Jacobson the idea to start a blog. Jacobson took this advice and started a blog on google, posting about 1-3 posts a day. For the first two years of the blogs existence, Jacobson was the only writer.

As time went on and he realized how much work it was to maintain a blog, he collaborated with one of his students at Cornell and she began posting onto the blog about once a week. Most posts revolved around events because these seemed to generate the most user traffic . Legal insurrection moved away from google. Jacobson revealed an email from google saying that his blog was reported as spam. They gave him a time limit to respond to the email otherwise the blog would be removed. Jacobson decided to move away from google, scared about how much power and control it had. He moved on, collaborating with a small company where he has to pay a couple hundred dollars a month. This new site features advertisements and a higher level of organization. While the blog does get most of its revenue from advertisements, it also encourages donations from readers.

Jacobson’s visit to my class taught me the importance of timeliness. A blogger, as well as any journalist, needs to constantly update the public. Jacobson said that if he were to take breaks from blogging, his site would experience a major decrease in views. People don’t want to visit sites when the information hasn’t been updated. He also said that in order to get more views, it’s a good idea for bloggers to send their links to other sites. The sites might refer back to the blog, increasing the blog’s overall audience.

Overall I learned that as a blogger, you have to be confident that there is a group out there that will respect what you have to say. As long as you are true to what you believe and you represent yourself accurately and adopt a crucial journalistic mindset and skill set, everything else will figure itself out.

The article “1,000 True Fans” (http://kk.org/thetechnium/2008/03/1000-true-fans/)  discusses how in order for an artist, a producer, inventor, or any individual creator needs to have 1,000 true fans in order to be successful. A true fan is a person who follows the creator, buys all of his/her merchandise, drives long distances to see him/her preform. In other words, a true fan is completely loyal to the artist, and nothing stands between the artist and the fan. This strong bond is created by technology, allowing for the artist to directly communicate with the fan. Therefore, the fan feels close to the artist.

I found the information in this article to be troubling. Yes, I think it’s important for an artist to engage with his/her audience. But the way the article describes this relationship makes it seem that it is similar to prey and predator. The artist preys on the consumer, manipulating them in a way that will transform them into a fan. I think with bloggers, it’s absolutely necessary to engage with the audience via social media and the internet. After all, these platforms are the nature of the career. Without the internet there is no blogger. But I was always baffled as to how many actors and actresses were urged to get twitter accounts. Instead of advertising their talent in films, they advertised their persona. I think this is where the separation from celebrity and artist comes from. A true artist does not need social media for talent recognition, but a celebrity needs it for attention. It is probably true, for the most part, that encouraging technology-based engagement with the audience leads to a greater financial following.

It sickens me that there are so many talented, unrecognized artists. My sister is seventeen years old. She has been in a few independent films shot by NYU tisch students. The first director was a talented student who worked with actress Quevenzhané Wallis from The Beasts of the Southern Wild, a fantastic independent film which came out in the summer of 2013. I remember when my sister showed me some of his short films, I found his shots to be romantic, with soft lighting that rendered nature so beautifully. His films haven’t gotten much attention. This is partly because he isn’t as well known. Another director my sister worked with had won an oscar and had a celebrity producer for his upcoming film. Unfortunately, I cannot give any more details because the film has not come out yet and the producer can’t be named. I’m sure this film will be great, but it will undoubtedly receive a stronger following because of its celebrity status.

Furthermore, as a blogger I think it’s appropriate to seek fans. This is what blogging is about. Without fans or followers, a blog wouldn’t gain attention. But I do not think mainstream news should be seeking fans. The news should be giving information to the whole public, not in a manner that will get more “followers” with misleading headlines and sensational information.

When I was in middle school, me and my friends usually hung out after school, telling each other we would grab a snack and then get straight to our homework. I suppose middle school students are all somewhat optimistic, because we never did our homework. Our time was spent procrastinating on facebook, playing the sims, and then also looking up http://www.overheardinnewyork.com/. The site consists of real things overheard in New York City. Most things are out of context, so they’re actually very funny to read. We would take turns reading them out loud, laughing at the ridiculous things people said. But there was always a curiosity that kept us reading out loud-- perhaps we would be featured on the blog without even knowing it! I think this is what is so fascinating about overhear in New York-- The entire New York City population makes up its subject matter, therefore it is possible to read something you have said on the blog. I remember reading it and thinking “Well, I could’ve said that..”

Like most blogs, Overheardinnewyork.com owes its success to its specific niche but appeals to such a large audience. Therefore, people can’t go to other news sites to get the same information. The information on the blog is unique. The title is also straight forward, communicating to its readers exactly what kind of information the blog features. It also is written entirely for its audience. Unlike mainstream news sites that do not allow for much reader participation or engagement, overheardinnewyork.com would not survive without its interactive readers. Readers are able to post what they’ve heard in New York while the staff members select ones to post onto the blog. The writers and the readers work together to create the site, creating a tight bond between the two. I think the mainstream could learn more from blogs, especially when it comes to reader engagement. The writers of mainstream outlets should be writing for their readers, but instead, many write for advertisers. The news system has become corrupt, favoring money rather than ethical principles. If the mainstream news outlets created a platform for reader participation, then mainstream news might become more trustworthy. The news is for the people, so that we can function in a society that is supposed to be democratic. When the news is filtered based on advertisements and massive corporations, we lose our identity as a democratic country.

In John Tozzi’s “Bloggers Bring in the Big Bucks,” he discusses the viral blog I Can Has Cheezburger (http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/stories/2007-07-13/bloggers-bring-in-the-big-bucksbusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice).

The blog started off small, soon exploding into a site that got up to half a million hits per day. The blog features photos of cats with funny captions. It’s not a hard news blog whatsoever. It explores a very specific niche and gives people brief laughter in the midst of a rough day, during the mornings or a lunch break. It’s not that people are so invested in cat memes, but it becomes a way for people to have a place where they can escape reality for a short while. Therefore, it appeals to most people. People are always looking to escape, and the internet provides a suitable outlet for this escape. It also encourages reader interaction. Tozzi states, “Part of it has to do with the nature of the medium: Blogging creates a direct connection between authors and readers, a conversation with distinct voices carried out in comments and e-mails and other blogs...” Tozzi describes the interactive nature of blogs. This is probably what makes them so successful. Readers like to be a part of something that allows for their participation. I think what also makes blogs so successful is that they cater to a specific audience. I just started following several fashion blogs on Instagram. Most of them revolve around an individual’s personal lifestyle, including fashion, food, and travel. I usually look for people who have similar style to me or people whose style I admire. I’ve always been really interested in fashion, but I have recently become more serious about making a career out of it. Recently I read a book called How to Be Parisian Wherever You Are by a group of female Parisian friends, including Caroline De Maigret, a well known Parisian style icon. The book acts more as a blog than a novel, suggesting that blogs can take countless formats. The book offers style advice, relationship advice, etc. It describes the Parisian woman as fearless, feminist, wild, and strong. It basically describes what every woman aspires to be like. One reads the book and marvels at the depiction of the perfect woman. The book has been advertised internationally and has gained an eclectic readership. Advertised at Marc Jacobs trendy bookstore in the West Village, celebrities and fashionistas in New York City gathered for a signed copy. It has an incredibly strong following, quickly becoming a must-read in the fashion community. Because the book describes several qualities of a Parisian woman, the reader will most likely identify with a few of themselves, projecting themselves onto the woman De Maigret describes. It would be interesting to see the book transform into an online blog. Right now the book  has an Instagram and a twitter, but both act as an advertising device for the book. The book has the potential to turn into a complete sensation if it created an outlet for readers to post their own photographs and writing to the page that correlated to the book’s subject matter. This would be a successful way to keep the conversation going between women everywhere.

Free Lovers and Gender Equality

In Chapter four of Rodger Streitmatter’s Voices of Revolution titled “Promoting Free Love in the Victorian Age,” Rodger explores gender roles in marriage. In the 1860s, The Revolution questioned the institution of marriage. They called themselves free lovers because they believed that a marriage should solely be based on love. They did not think that a woman’s identity should only be based on her relationship with her husband. They wanted women to thrive independently without limitations that gender imposed.

Gender equality is a topic that is widely discussed today. In Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s infamous TED talk, she shines light on the issue (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg3umXU_qWc).  She talks specifically about her African heritage where gender is treated as a binary. She recalls a time when she handed money to a valet parker in Lagos and instead of thanking her, the beggar looking to her male friend and thanked him. He assumed that she had not earned the money she was handing him. He believed that whatever money she did have was given to her by a man. The problem, Adichie states, is that men usually do not actively think about gender. The valet parker naturally assumed that the money was not hers because he was raised to think this way. This is where Adichie raises a solution. She says that in order to change the way we think of gender we must unlearn what we naturally learned was the norm.

When my mother was seven years old in the Dominican Republic, she already knew how to cook. Often times she cooked arroz con habichuelas for twenty people. As a girl, she was taught that cooking was her duty. Adichie makes an enlightening statement about this in her TED talk. She says,

I know a family that have both a son and a daughter, both of whom are brilliant at school, who are wonderful, lovely children. When the boy is hungry, the parents say to the girl, “Go and cook Indomie noodles for your brother.” Now the daughter doesn’t particularly like to cook Indomie noodles, but she’s a girl, and so she has to. Now what if the parents, from the beginning, taught both the boy and the girl to cook indomie? Cooking, by the way, is a very useful skill for boys to have. I’ve never thought it made sense to leave such a crucial thing, the ability to nourish oneself, in the hands of others.

In my family, my mother does most of the cooking. Because my father works and my mother doesn’t, she’s claimed it to be her responsibility to cook for her family. Granted, my mother is a fantastic cook and she loves cooking for us. I think it’s okay if a woman happens to do more of the “feminine” tasks in a relationship, as long as it’s not treated as her duty as a woman to do so. At first glance, my parent’s marriage may seem conventional like the marriages Streitmatter discusses in his book. But they have one of the most nurturing and supportive relationships I’ve ever seen. My father actively acknowledges that my mother cooks and he thanks her after each meal, knowing that she doesn’t have to cook for us. And she knows this too. On weekends my father sometimes cooks one of the very few meals he does know how to make. He makes an elaborate dinner with lobster and we are all very grateful. He also constantly urges my mother to open up her own restaurant. I think a lot of gender equality has to do with seeing conventionality but not succumbing to its stereotypes-- My mother cooks but my father doesn’t accept her to do so because of her gender. But sometimes I wonder if my mother in fact does feel like cooking is something she needs to do. Adichie says, “We teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller. We say to girls, ‘You can have ambition but not too much. You should aim to be successful, but not too successful, otherwise you will threaten the man.” Sometimes when we talk about my mother opening a restaurant, she’s always unsure if it will work out. She says “Restaurants are hard work.” I know this. But I also want her to know that cooking is something she can make a living out of, instead of only applying the skill in a domestic atmosphere. I also know that if anyone is capable to run a business it’s my mother. She is stronger and more passionate than most men I know today. I hope my mother is not afraid of having ambition. And I hope that she will one day find herself more than capable to do something she loves.

Adichie believes we should unlearn gender conventions we were taught at a young age. And we should teach both boys and girls activities that have been mostly acquired by females. A few months ago, I went to dinner with a man. I’m not sure how we came upon the subject, but at one point he asked if I knew how to cook. And I said “Not at all” and he said, “What will you do when you have a husband?” I was completely stunned by his question. It’s not that this man is usually rude, it’s just that he isn’t actively thinking about gender. He grew up to learn that men inherit responsibility while women inherit domesticity. His father owns restaurants around the world, and when it was time for his father to retire, the responsibilities were passed down to him. He will most likely grow up as the provider of his family.

I think we have a lot more work to do in our quest for gender equality. We have to unlearn what we know and we have to teach children differently. We need more women and men like the writers in free-loving revolutionary newspapers to make us active thinkers and question why things are the way they are.

The first three chapters of Voices of Revolution by Rodger Streitmatter focus on ways in which advocates transformed society by using unconventional media publications. The chapters specifically focus on American Labor, the Abolitionist movement, and women’s rights. What’s interesting about these movements is that they tried to reverse a way of life that was so hard wired into society. For example, the belief that a woman’s sole purpose was to marry and then birth children was a widely accepted concepts. People grew up with strict gender binaries and expectations, and it’s not that they were horrible people to have accepted it, it’s just what they always knew. I think now, living in a more free society, it’s easy for us to think: How could women accept such horrible conditions? Or… If I lived in that time I would have done something sooner. The problem is that for the most part, we are the product of our times. I don’t mean that we are completely delusional by the current state of things, but I do think that many people naturally tend to agree with the majority. Growing up in the East Village, in New York City, I was always urged to be curious and question my surroundings. The East Village by nature has a rebellious character and most of its inhabitants like to question those in power. Maybe this is why the East Village has a reputation for being a place for bohemian, free thinkers. My high school molded me to be a highly analytical person, even encouraging us to question our professors and the overall world we lived in. New York has a lot to do with who I am. We embrace things that are out of the ordinary and unconventional. But I don’t know if I would still be who I am today if I lived in a small town in the Dominican Republic where my mother grew up where she was taught to be more reserved and to not question her authorities.

I think it takes a true advocate to live in a society that is so hard wired towards a certain belief and then to passionately go against it without fear. William Lloyd Garrison lived in a culture where slavery was widely accepted. He recognized it was an unjust practice and worked hard to abolish it. He published his own publication called The Liberator, publishing articles that went against the harmful practice. While he published his own ideas, Garrison still needed help from mainstream media. This was the only way his articles would have gained a large audience. He circulated his articles to mainstream media editors. Although these editors criticized him, denouncing his arguments as outrageous, Garrison gained the attention he wanted. The editors published their criticisms in their mainstream publications that were read by most of literate America. Therefore, although independent media strays away from mainstream outlets, mainstream media is still necessary to circulate information and gain a large audience.

After reading Will Bunch’s “A Landmark for Bloggers-- and the Future of Journalism,” I began to think more about what Independent media does so differently than mainstream media that captures the attention of so many internet users. After reading this article I found the answer: Independent media provides a distinct voice to readers.

Coming to Ithaca College as a Journalism major was difficult because it seemed that so many of my professors had already imagined our careers in mainstream media. Our personal voices were muddled by mainstream expectations. I’ve always known that my interests did not lie in traditional reporting, but I didn’t feel supported in this decision. No matter how much independent media has begun to dominate the flood of news, it seems that so many journalism professors still hold tightly to mainstream outlets. Many condemn independent media such as blogs, deeming them irrelevant. But I want to challenge these professors. If journalism relies on the current state of the world, shouldn’t we (as journalists) understand the current state of news in our culture and accept independent media as viable news outlets? Instead of stubbornly seeking news only from mainstream outlets, we should focus on the strong emerging voices found in independent media that have begun to shape the news today.

While the article focuses on Talking Points Memo, a political site, the underlying messages can be applicable to all independent outlets. Bunch discusses the internet as an innovative platform to tell news “by using new techniques that emphasize collaboration over competition and by working with readers and through collective weight of many news sources…” Bunch discusses independent media’s interactiveness and innovativeness. Because they focus on only independent voices, they are free to present their biases and take their own stance on an issue. Bloggers have the freedom to unveil their true voices because they’re not tied to a mainstream outlet. Blogging seems to be a democratization of news. A good example of this democratization is Tavi Gevinson, editor of Rookie magazine. Tavi broke the mold of fashion media which was primarily led by Vogue editor Anna Wintour. Tavi, only fifteen when she first started Rookie Magazine,  took the fashion industry by storm, reminding the public that fashion and style is subjective and should not be dominated by only a few publications. Although she is young, she is bold and is able to hold power in one of the most critical industries.