Subject-Verb Agreement

As an aspiring journalist, it is clearly important to have a good fundamental structure with regards to grammar. That being said, one of the most important parts of grammar is having a clear understanding of a sentence structure; it is vital to be able to isolate the individual components that come together to form a sentence, as well as understanding how each of these parts of speech works. Subjects (nouns) and verbs are truly the foundation of a sentence, and things like articles, adjectives, and adverbs are included to add colour and dimension. However, although subjects and verbs seem fairly self-explanatory, there are agreements between the two that must be followed in professional writing.

When subjects take singular form, there must be a singular verb that follows. The same can be said for plural subjects and verbs. An example of this structure would look like this:

She dances.

They dance.

Now, if for some reason these verbs were proceeded by subjects in a different form than previously stated, it would read as follows:

She dance.

They dances.

Clearly, it doesn't take an expert to spot this flaw, because it simply sounds incorrect. On the other hand, there are certain subjects that are improperly paired with verbs due to their confusing structure. Take for example, if you will, the following:

Three and three are six.

As first glance, this seems correct because the subject is compound, meaning more than one. However, having a compound subject does not automatically require a plural verb. Regardless of the sentence structure, the decision of making the verb singular or plural is based on the form of the subject closest to the verb. The latter result should read as such:

Three and three is six.

On a side note, when it comes to lyrics of songs, the subject-verb agreements are typically thrown aside for affect; singing "Ain't No Mountain High Enough" would be as pleasing to the ear as "There Is Not a Mountain High Enough."

The first set of comments (currently 34) under Lecture 3 highlights a number of news headlines in which students have identified the sentence subject and verb, and showed the way these words work together under the sentence-verb agreement. http://prow135journalists.blogspot.com/2010/01/lecture-3-grammar-and-journalism-20.html#comments

For more information on subject-verb agreements, check out this link: http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/GRAMMAR/sv_agr.htm

Note: Image from: http://www.mhhe.com/socscience/english/langan/cws/stu_olc/graphics/langan5ecws_s/ppts/sub_verb_agreement/img001.jpg

E-Portfollio - Journalism 2.0

Journalism has to evolve in order to stay an important part of a socioty that increasingly turns more and more toward digital technoglogy. It will have to bend a bit, and so will it's practitioners. I see journalism moving completly into the online world in the future; print, video and audio all coming together to complement each other and form into a complete picture of the events unfolding. While now, different agencies focus thier attention to one form of media over the other, I would not be surprised to see agencies merging and becoming multi focused. Over time, perhaps just audio by itself will find it no longer has a place as users only respond to video or text.

The internet has changed what we do, and will continue to change journalism in the future. It is a tool that adds, to the journalists arsonal, the ability to transmit information faster, and more accurately. Rikki talks about it in her article, The Importance of the Online World.

Citizen journalism takes more of a center stage in the Journalism 2.0 theory. Users could define what they whan thier news content be. To some degree we're already seeing that, users can send in whole stories to the Edmonton Sun's Program Yourscoop. An Article called Don't Throw Out the Baby talks about the lines between citizen journalism and professinal journalism. In it Bernard Lunn talks about the possiblilities of bloggers becoming journalists. This is a topic that has seen a lot of attention.

Read Between the Lines, Pamela Di PInto

Journalism 2.0, in simplest terms, "is the coming together of traditional journalism and technology," as Shannon Findlay mentioned in a comment on an earlier blog post. However, it also entails something more: Journalism 2.0 promotes the use of technology to enhance journalism practiced today. The most common example is the world of online journalism, where stories are no longer sole bodies of text, but supplemented with audio clips, video, and other forms of multi-media content. Citizens can even participate in this process through comments, blogs, and personalized posts on the social networking site of their choice (You win this time Twitter!). Yes, the digital age is upon us! Technology has rocked the boat of traditional journalism long considered the security blanket of journalists old and new. Some say this form of journalism will be lost altogether, growing older and more out-dated with each new "tweet" on the latest headline. Some, like myself, beg to differ.

In their report, "The Reconstruction of American Journalism", Leonard Downie Jr. and Michael Schudson concede that journalism is shifting from the traditional world to one that is more technologically-savvy. Despite this fact, they explain that "newspapers and television news are not going to vanish in the foreseeable future, despite frequent predictions of their imminent extinction. But they will play diminished roles in an emerging and still rapidly changing world of digital journalism..." In other words, take a breather! Your morning paper and evening news broadcast are staying right where they are...for now. However, as journalism continues to evolve in light of this "digital age," the form of journalistic content will have to evolve with it. This means traditional journalism will eventually be pushed to the back burner, while online journalism will emerge as the dominant means of information for news-goers.

The main point I want to drive home, though, is one again expressed in Downie and Schudson's "The Reconstruction of American Journalism." In their report, they outline that amidst this shift from traditional to online journalism, "what is paramount is preserving independent, original, credible reporting, whether or not it is popular or profitable, and regardless of the medium in which it appears." This statement really struck a chord with me because I realized how completely right they are! Yes, the vast majority of people today are drawn to online journalism because it is able to keep up with the fast pace of their daily lives, providing them with information at an instantaneous rate. Simply put, traditional journalism cannot keep up. This is why many people fear its "extinction," as mentioned earlier. However, what Downie and Schudson continue to stress in their report is that we should not fear the loss of this medium, but the loss of the journalism behind the medium. In other words, in shifting to online journalism, a reporter should not lose the basic journalistic principles rooted in traditional journalism. Online journalism is still journalism, and should act as such.

In conclusion, then, let us turn our attention to an old cliché: "Quality over quantity." In other words, journalism should still remain accurate, credible, and free from bias despite the medium in which it reaches consumers, and despite how prevalent that medium may be. The online world of journalism is said to possess an "unlimited" quality, free from space or time biases that often hindered traditional journalism. Even so, if the limitless world of online journalism is founded on poor journalism, ultimately devoid of "independent, original, credible reporting," then it is of no use to any news-goer. Therefore, I urge all you online-news addicts currently scanning the latest headlines to read between the lines! Poor journalism doesn't benefit anyone, despite how fast you can have it uploaded to your "Crackberry." Long live the fundamental principles of good journalism!

E-Portfolio Journalism 2.0 and Citizen Journalism, Brought to you in part by: Steven Wagers

The world of journalism is an ever changing one. Journalists adapt and conform to the new technologies that come along and that has resulted in what is being called "journalism 2.0".

What is journalism 2.0, you say? Well, this site will help you to learn how to adapt and flourish using journalism 2.0. It is the shift in the mindset towards the ways in which information is being presented. Some say that journalism 1.0 means that one person is talking and the others are listening. Journalism 2.0 leans much more towards being a conversation. Take a gander at almost any news site that is out there today. Almost all of these sites have a comment section underneath the story where anyone can voice their opinion as long as it relates to the topic at hand. This falls under the category of "citizen journalism." I know that I'm using a lot terms here, but these two concepts fit together very closely.

Citizen journalists are just normal people that have no background in journalism. This can refer to bloggers, commenters, or even people who just feel like running a website in their spare time. These citizen journalists have taken to the internet with force, and personally I think it's great. People are able to get interesting stories out to the public that 20 or 30 years ago, would have been impossible to share with mass audiences from their homes. People of celebrity status can give us insight into their daily lives through blog posts, and twitter updates. Technology has advanced so much in the last couple decades, it is hard to fathom living in an age without cell phones, facebook, and wide access to computers, which brings me to a final point.

Technology. It doesn't stop here. Journalists have been practising their trade for hundreds of years and yet they have lasted this long. Many people believe that journalism is being killed by the internet but I think it is only going to keep expanding. Sure the journalism we once knew may be on its death bed but journalism as a whole will live on. That is what journalism 2.0 is all about.

Not the end of journalism altogether.

It's only a change in mindset.

-From the Desk of Steven Wagers

Image taken from adamstouch.com/?p=218

Citizen Journalism and the Future of Journalism, Jennifer Carbert

The Internet has caused the world to blur the lines between citizen journalists and working journalists. In this blog for clarity purposes we will call the traditional newspaper or broadcasting reporter a working reporter, and a citizen who takes interest in world events and posts blogs about subjects online a citizen journalist.

Arianna Huffington, in a conference in Washington DC said,

"The contributions of citizen journalists, bloggers, and others who aren't paid to cover the news are constantly mocked and derided by the critics of new media who clearly don't understand that technology has enabled millions of consumers to shift their focus from passive observation to active participation -- from couch potato to self-expression."

Some Journalists feel threatened by citizen journalist. They feel as though citizens are taking over the news business and not accurately reporting the news. Working Journalists believe all citizen journalism is riddled with personal opinion and bias and readers will not be able to discern the difference between editorials parading as news, and well researched news articles. This may be true, some readers may not be able to tell the difference between solid research and opinion laced articles, but many people know the difference and feel more included in the news process when they can contribute.

Huffignton was explaining that technology has changed so therefore the news business must change to keep up. Sites such as AllVoices.com creatively allow readers to interact with the news and write stories, but they also include articles from trusted, long-established new rooms. Citizens can contribute and cover the news working journalists are not informed of are simply do not have time or space to cover. Citizen journalism has opened up the field, no longer are journalists the strong gate-keepers of information, but they are simply the trusted sources used to verify information given by others.

Blogs and citizen journalism are under close watch by the working journalist; however, due to the open content of the internet working journalists and news rooms cannot control what content is posted, or viewed. Instead of complaining about the inconstancies of citizen journalists, working journalists should accept the fact that they are allowed to write whatever they want. Keeping on top of these articles and following up on unknown stories is a great source of information. Verifying information, and balancing possible biased articles from citizen journalists will also give the working journalist more credibility in the eyes of the reader.

Note: Image from http://sajadi4.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/wethemedia1.jpg

Lecture 3: Grammar and Journalism 2.0

Outline:

Review Subject-Verb Agreement
Activity
Journalism 2.0
Add to E-Portfolio
Homework

Definition:

Subject–verb agreement is “the matching of the number and person of the subject to the form of the verb. When the subject is third-person singular and the verb is in the present tense, the verb takes the –s inflection, as in: The dog barks all night. He bothers the neighbours.
With other subjects and in other tenses, verbs (with the exception of be) do not change to match the number or person of the subject: I sleep, we sleep, he slept, they slept.”

Basic Idea:

Singular subjects need singular verbs; plural subjects need plural verbs.
My brother is a nutritionist.
My sisters are mathematicians.

Visit the Subject-Verb Agreement site: http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/sv_agr.htm

Activity:

—Go to: http://jamestaylor.lyrics.info/rainydayman.html

—Read the lyrics

—

How does the song describe the Rainy Day Man? (answers on board) Is the agreement correct?

“The Reconstruction of American Journalism” (http://www.cjr.org/reconstruction/the_reconstruction_of_american.php)

"What is under threat is independent reporting that provides information, investigation, analysis, and community knowledge, particularly in the coverage of local affairs."

"Reporting is becoming more participatory and collaborative. The ranks of news gatherers now include not only newsroom staffers, but freelancers, university faculty members, students, and citizens."

"Universities, both public and private, should become ongoing sources of local, state, specialized subject, and accountability news reporting as part of their educational missions. They should operate their own news organizations, host platforms for other nonprofit news and investigative reporting organizations, provide faculty positions for active individual journalists, and be laboratories for digital innovation in the gathering and sharing of news and information."

Links mentioned in class:

http://www.edmontonsun.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/walter-cronkite/
http://darynkagan.com/index.html
http://news.google.com/
http://digg.com/
http://english.ohmynews.com/
http://www.flickr.com/
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Main_Page

Note: Image from wikinews.

Independent news is thriving, but mainstream news still dominates online:
CTV is the top choice for Canadians (41%)
CBC Television (38%)
CTV is especially popular in Atlantic Canada (61%) and Manitoba and Saskatchewan (60%)
Albertans are torn between Global and CTV for their top news source, with both stations selected by 42%

Stats from: http://www.angusreidstrategies.com/uploads/pages/pdfs/2007.06.06%20National%20Media%20Press%20Release.pdf

Homework:

Read “Crap Detection 101” by Howard Rheingold

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/rheingold/detail?entry_id=42805

Note: Grammar cartoon from grammar café and image of Howard Rheingold from SF Gate.

Lecture 2: Copy Editing Student Work