Emma Hoffman

I thought the same thing. I think it’s reasonable for media to ignore unfounded claims but, at the same time, some argue there needs to be clarification or fact-checking of even the most egregious claims, which we are seeing more and more of. Both actions seem to have consequences #UWJ201 #301

I think real-time ad bidding encourages tactics like third party data exchange, which often happens without the consumer’s knowledge. I thought the concerns expressed in that article were justified. I think AI and consumer data will only become bigger parts of advertising #UWJ201 #301

This week we discussed methods of persuasion. Which technique do you think is most effective? Further, do you think persuasion that plays on people emotions or biases is acceptable in advertising? #UWJ201 #301

I think the “news finds me” media diet and its relation to conspiratorial thinking is accurate. I think many with that diet assume they have the common sense to tell right from wrong when the “news finds them” but without actually reading news they often fall for conspiracies. #UWJ201 #301

I think this finding is still accurate. But I think something like absolute devotion to a politician or party can also lend itself to conspiracy theories when people seek answers for why their preferred candidate, for example, lost an election #UWJ201 #301

Why do you think conspiracy theories gain so much traction online if there are clear efforts made by credible sources to debunk myths and deliver truthful information? Should media outlets work to counter conspiracy theories or simply ignore ridiculous claims? #UWJ201 #301

Even when I agree with the sentiments of the journalist, I can’t help but note where opinions are inserted, especially in pieces that aren’t specifically designated as editorial/opinion pieces. 2/2 #UWJ201 #301

Ever since I learned the term “editorializing,” I began to think almost every piece of journalism that wasn’t entirely objective was biased to some extent 1/2 #UWJ201 #301

However, media companies are dependent on engagement for profit so attention grabbing seems somewhat necessary for such companies to function 2/2 #UWJ201 #301

It may not be inherently bad, but focusing on attention grabbing seems like a slippery slope into sensationalism, exaggeration, and falsifying facts. It’s an individual choice to be or not be politically engaged and I don’t think it’s the job of media to make people care 1/2 #UWJ201 #301

Have you ever experienced the hostile media effect? Do you often find yourself becoming defensive of your position when reading/viewing something that is critical of it or do you tend to approach such media with an open mind? Further, how might we combat this effect in ourselves? #UWJ201 #301

There have always been limitations to making decisions without full information but we are in an era where the drawbacks of such a process are exacerbated (2/2 #UWJ201 #301)

I think social media has hindered this process. Because of biased algorithms which only aim to increase time spent on a given social media site and the ability for anyone to post anything, this process has been tainted (1/2 #UWJ201 #301)

I think it definitely has the capability to shift one’s attitude. Considering “mean world theory,” it makes sense that constant consumption of negative news can create a new mindset. However, I think it would be more difficult to have a positive mindset shift through news consumption. #UWJ201 #301

This week we discussed a component of digital media marketing - user generated content. In past lectures we discussed how people tend to be skeptical of overt advertisements. Do you think UGC overcomes this issue or do you find that UGC can be just as likely to cause negative reactions? #UWJ201 #301

I think the future of advertisements, for better or worse, will be AI. Using AI will be cost efficient for companies and allow extremely individual targeting. Also, I think advertisers might feel that they have peaked with human-made content/“innovative tactics” and will resign to AI #UWJ201 #301

I’m not sure this is an exclusively American issue but I think with our two-party system, Americans are likely to use heuristic methods or “mental shortcuts.” A person can determine if something is more Democratic or Republican and consider their existing attitudes to form an opinion #UWJ201 #301

The Valenzuela article suggests that in order to combat low-quality news and avoidance of news altogether, governments could utilize quotas for public affairs content on users’ feeds. What role, if any, should the government play in this situation? Should news be monitored for quality? #UWJ201 #301

Absolutely. I have memories of news stories I saw years ago that frightened me and have stayed with me since. The “mean world syndrome” article stuck out to me for this reason. Watching TV news has usually been a negative experience for me and typically caused me stress in some way. #UWJ201 #301

News, social media, etc can present distressing content that can have a lifelong effect on a person. I think there needs to be a more conscious effort to protect children from sensitive content, especially considering the proliferation of social media and its growing youth demographic #UWJ201 #301

I think there needs to be a balance. Children need to be aware of certain things to help keep them safe and provide a better transition into adulthood, where evading “awareness” is much more difficult. But it’s also very important to protect the mental well-being of children. 1/2

Considering the Devega and Noble readings from this week, do you think paid/promoted content should be allowed in search engines? Could this type of content help rectify the issues Devega discussed or exacerbate them? #UWJ201 #301

I think the role of a journalist is to provide facts, and in some cases opinion, with integrity. Another important role that is often overlooked, though, is that of the audience to fact check and use critical thinking while engaging with mass media. 2/2 #UWJ201 #301

Most of us are driven, at least in part, by some ulterior motive. Not all are necessarily malicious, but some people probably do intend to do some harm through their journalistic endeavors - which is a problem. 1/2
#UWJ201 #301

Yes, even if an individual is trying to be objective or present a “balanced” story, I think altering or not delivering the truth to the best of one’s ability detracts from the integrity of the content. Choosing words that don’t convey the reality of a situation is harmful.

#UWJ201 #301

This week we discussed framing in mass communications. Can framing ever be avoided, especially considering cognitive biases or the nearly impossible-to-reach standard of complete objectivity? Is framing necessarily a bad thing? #UWJ201 #301

Participants know they are in a study and the environment they’re in is not necessarily representative of their everyday lives. We don’t know how relevant or real the content shown to participants seemed. These changes in context may have an effect on the outcomes of the experiment. #UWJ201 #301

Due to partisanship, people are less likely to trust sources that show any leniency towards the group(s) they are not aligned with. Not only are the clearly biased sources losing public trust, but the sources that don’t entirely support the views of partisans are also losing credibility #UWJ201 #301

We discussed the societal functions of journalism on Monday, one of which being to keep those in power accountable. Do you think today’s press fulfills that function consistently? Over time, has the press maintained its position as a reliable and capable source of power-checking? #UWJ201 #301

Yes, people are persuaded not just because of ownership but because of the content they see that they deem to be rational. Corporate or financial interests may not be at play in this situation but people could still be swayed by journalists who have their own motives and biases #UWJ201 #301