Online writing/editing

Headline: New Orleans Population Still Half of Expected Size
Intro Blurb: New Orleans' lack of growth 17 months after Hurricane Katrina is worrying economists and demographers, prompting them to wonder if the city's population will ever grow again. [insert link]

Graphics suggestions:

• Line graph showing 1) population growth in New Orleans from 1997 to 2007, and 2) chart showing unemployment rate in New Orleans from 1997 to 2007.
  
• Slideshow showing pictures of current New Orleans with captions describing the scenes.
  
• A video interview with a current resident of New Orleans describing the situation.
  
• A list detailing the underlying characteristics of New Orleans before Katrina: 1) losing people at the rate of perhaps 1.5 percent a year before Hurricane Katrina, with a stagnant economy, 2) more than a quarter of the population living in poverty, and 3) a staggeringly high rate of unemployment, in which as many as one in five were jobless or not seeking work.
• Compare economic growth, population growth and crime rate to other cities affected by Katrina, including Houston and Biloxi, Miss.
  

The empty streets and abandoned houses prompt a gnawing question, nearly 17 months after Hurricane Katrina: Is this what New Orleans has come to -- a city half its old size?

The low population figure, 191,000, which was reported by the Louisiana Recovery Authority in November last year in the most credible survey to date, was about half the 444,000 count in a Census estimate before Hurricane Katrina.

The number was surprising, dashing expectations of a ''big return,'' as one economist put it, and was hotly disputed by local officials. Crippling problems that existed long before Hurricane Katrina are mostly being blamed for the city's failure to thrive.

In New Orleans, before the storm, about 4 out of 10 men in the working-age population were out of a job or not looking for one, compared with less than 3 in 10 nationally.

''Where there are high concentrations of poverty, people can't see a way out,'' said William Oakland, a retired economist from Tulane University who has studied the city's economy for decades. ''Maybe the diaspora is a blessing.''

Others, however, worry that permanently losing so many people threatens the city's culture -- its unique way of talking, parading and eating.

''Culture is people,'' said Richard Campanella, a Tulane geographer who has written extensively about the city's neighborhoods. ''If half the local people are dispersed and no longer living cohesively in those social networks, then half of local culture is gone.''

Compounding the city's difficulties, and, in effect, helping to stem the population loss, was a secondary factor: the direness of the city's poverty, and its concentration. Those conditions helped make the city's poor population exceptionally immobile.

''The job mobility was very low among the poor, so they just stay where they are, and the social welfare system shored them up,'' Mr. Oakland said.

''It's not normal to have that level of nonparticipation in the labor force,'Mr. Oakland added.

Haunting the city's effort to repopulate, too, is the incalculable toll inflicted by ghosts from its past -- a political legacy of corruption and patronage, and a deep racial division with a far more distressing passage toward integration than was experienced, say, in Atlanta.

More than half of young black men ages 16 to 24 were not in the labor force. Unemployment rates among young blacks were above 25 percent. ''The data is showing New Orleans is really a basket case,'' Mr. Oakland said.

The new doubts also take into account the current barriers to repopulation, including the well-documented failure of the state's Road Home aid program for homeowners, the loss of tens of thousands of jobs since the storm, the crime problem and delays in rebuilding moderately priced housing.

Official efforts -- local, state and federal -- to rebuild the network of hospitals, schools and public housing projects that once served the city's huge poor population have been faltering.

''The longer it lasts, the more likely it is that our population is plateauing, the longer the uncertainty continues,'' said Janet Speyrer, an economist at the University of New Orleans.

--Edited for the web by Deepa Seetharaman. Original article published Jan. 21, 2007 in the New York Times. Link to original story: New Orleans of Future May Stay Half its Old Size, By Adam Nossiter.

video journalism

I've always been suspicious of anything resembling television journalism. Call it my prejudice, but I don't think many TV anchors are using their powers to propagate meaningful journalism. Rather they show us bowling matches, dog shows and little kids at camp. (Really, it's not the dog shows. It's more like the too-tan news anchor with teeth shinier than bicycle reflectors.) So, I've always preferred writing and even radio over television. But video journalism became a reality for journalists in newsrooms, it became apparent to me that if, indeed, I want to live my life as an underpaid lackey for a news organization, I would have to understand and even succumb to video journalism.

That was about two years ago. A lot has changed since then.

Video journalism, as the newspaper people do it, provides content narrated in a sensible way. The videos are often short and cover the background. Reporters for the NYTimes know this best. They have reporter Jeffrey Gettleman show us Somalia in two weeks. Instead of reading his (often excellent) descriptions of conditions, Gettleman can actually show us what he is seeing. This is good in quite a few ways. First, it gives us something akin to a primary document and breaks down the barriers between the reader, viewer and listener and the information. Second, it builds trust between the reporter and the reader. This trust is especially crucial at this time when newspapers are seen as merely branches of a corporation. Third, it better illustrates the reporter's point. Just watch A.O. Scott's brilliant movie reviews. Interspersed with his image (Scott cultivates a slightly pompous persona with his nose up in the air and his monotone voice. I'm sorry, did I say 'slightly'?) are clips of the actual movie. You can get a sneak peak of the film as well as hear Scott's often amusing reviews.

The New York Times does it well because it does not merely shovel the new of its television partner (not that it has one) on the web. The Chicago Tribune could have a much better video site if they had reporters create their own mini-documentaries. That takes resources, however, and the reality is, we work in an industry with scant resources. The Tribune's multimedia page, however, is top notch. Its photo essays are often moving and interesting. I am also reminded of the Washington Post's powerful multimedia essay titled "Being a Black Man." This work was among the most interesting and thought-provoking I've seen on the web. Besides fascinating content, the essay is also visually appealing and well scripted.

Part of me wonders if we're catering to that 'consumer' friendly paradigm by providing video with our news stories. Whatever happened to imagination? But a larger, less sentimental portion of me believes that as things in this world grow increasingly uncertain, readers, viewers and listeners want more proof. Proof they will get with video journalism.

flash assignment #1 (for real)

https://depot.northwestern.edu/dse606/public_html/assignment%201%20deepa%20final.swf

Okay...so now what?

In "From Tom Paine to Blogs and Beyond", Dan Gillmor traces the history of American journalism from the pamphleteers of the revolutionary era to -- you guessed it-- blogs and beyond. The article's wide sweep means it is often unfocused, equivocal and dull. Still, Gillmor's approach resembles the current dialogue about new media. Journalists tend to eulogize the past when newspapers were the sole bearer of often bad news-- Gillmor describes previous journalistic efforts as "civic-minded and occasionally controversial." He lauds journalists who reported the news at a "great personal risk." He cites the printing of the Federalist Papers as a key reason the constitution was approved. Nevermind that these newsletters were often dramatically slanted and resolutely political. Nevermind that their fiery, bombastic language and shocking headlines were more akin to propaganda. Nevermind that the shenanigans of Hearst resulted in a war. Gillmor mentions this facts without actually addressing them, thus providing a incomplete picture of the journalism Tom Paine enjoyed.

Especially interesting, however, is Gillmor's discussion of the writer I.F. Stone. Gillmor calls Stone one of his "journalistic heroes." I find this interesting because Stone avoided press conferences and briefings, preferring instead to "scour and devour" dense documents, The Congressional Record and other obscure committee reports. Is this journalism? As a result, he routinely scooped mainstream media. I think this was largely due to the fact that Stone delved into primary documents and ignored the mating cry of the government PR flak. In other words, Stone was a blogger before the Internet was invented.

My point is that while the Internet is new, blogs and all that they symbolize are not. Dave Winer didn't do anything groundbreaking or new. Blogs have been around for centuries. One could argue that even the Federalist Papers and other pamphlets were blogs as they provided an opinion along with information. Winer merely used a new, groundbreaking format to do something that was actually pretty cliche. Furthermore, newspapers as we know them today are a relatively recent invention. They were always money-minded and always aimed at getting new readers. My big problem with Gillmor is that he tends to paint journalism's past in too simple shades.

Okay...so now what? What does my criticism mean for the future of journalism? I don't disagree that the newspaper industry is in trouble, but it is not due to blogs. Like Gillmor, I don't think this sort of journalism means traditional mainstream media will be edged out. The edge mainstream media has is that it is a compendium of voices and opinions. Winer is one man espousing his opinion and including the commentary of those he chooses or choose to post. The NY Times will report Winer's opinion but also actively seek dissenting and slightly differing voices. Here newspapers transgress their classification as a one-to-many medium, and become a many-to-many forum. This indicates to me that newspapers still have holding power.