500-word project explanation

Explanation of Final Project

My design philosophy on this project was simplicity. When we took a look at the nameplates and designs of many of the most successful papers, one thing stood out to me: how simple their design was. The papers that got overloaded with graphics and had tremendously complex nameplates were the least visually appealing to me. Papers like the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times are two of the most highly-renowned papers on earth, and also have some of the most simple designs.

I started my design with the nameplate. I chose a font that I found to be visually clean, simple and elegant. The text for “The Washingtonian” is bordered on each side by a set of lines of varying thickness; nothing too complex. The font for my nameplate was a serif typeface, which I think lends the paper an air of credibility and seriousness upon first glancing at the page. The headlines and sub-heads are the same font but different sizes and either bolded or regular. The same theme with horizontal lines is present in the headlines as well, keeping the design scheme consistent.

I added a pale green (it turned out gray on the printed copy) to the Baghdad story, as it was the most important. That same pale green is featured in the teasers, social media box, and website box at the bottom. I think the green adds just enough color without obscuring text, and Washingtonians will identify with the scheme (the Evergreen State).

I also tried to keep everything very symmetrical on the front page, I don’t really have a purpose for that other than it looks nice, and directs your attention to the most important story right away (which is easily picked out by the extremely thick, sans-serif font with the largest size).

I chose the Baghdad story, because regardless of where you are in the U.S., this is the biggest news of the day. The attacks targeted Americans in a country we are holding a war in, so the information is extremely relevant. The pictures I featured on the front were the two most compelling photos from the most compelling story. I don’t feel like it was an overload on Baghdad content for the first page because the story was so big.

I chose the stock market story to run on the front page because it was also big news. Stocks dropping that low affect everyone, and national news of that caliber takes president over local news of lesser importance. I ran the politician story on the front because it was a local event, and there’s always room on the front page for compromised politicians (which seem to be big news sellers these days).

My second page had two newsworthy stories that covered a large portion of Washington and its residents. The second page narrows the stories down from national to local.

I designed my paper to be read by the Washington citizen. It would be a one-stop location for Washingtonians that wanted the most important national news, but also more statewide information than they would get from local or national papers. My readers would expect a clean, and easy-to-read design with the best breaking news, but more importantly, excellent reporting on state issues (be it east or west side).

Note: I had some problems with how the pages printed. The pictures weren’t very sharp and the ink printed unevenly. The green I chose for the teasers, Baghdad and other pieces turned out much darker than the .pdf or InDesign document.

5 differences

1. No ads on the header of the paper

2. Headlines outline importance on paper

3. Opportunity to engage in social media interaction online

4. Color online in more than text

5. Vertical v. Horizontal orientation

obesity

Assignment V: Ethics II

The ethical dilemma is illustrated well by the fourth tenant in the NPPA Code of Ethics: “Treat all subjects with respect and dignity. Give special consideration to vulnerable subjects and compassion to victims of crime or tragedy. Intrude on private moments of grief only when the public has an overriding and justifiable need to see.”

The dilemma here is between treating the juvenile subject, in her time of immense grief, with respect and dignity, or intruding on her private moment of grief. Does the public have the right to see the image? If they do, do they have the need to see it. That’s the moral dilemma.

As with our last ethics assignment, I don’t see much room for middle ground. You either publish the photo or you don’t. Maybe the photographer took another picture that was less intrusive, or that cropped out the face, which could be used. Blurring out anything in the photo wouldn’t work either. Maybe you could publish the photo on the inside of your paper, rather than the front page. It is a very terrifying and striking image, vivid with emotion and candor. Some may find it disturbing, so perhaps there’s a compromise when displaying the image.

I would publish the image. From what we learned in class, the State Department reformed their policy to curb events like this in the future. That’s probably a benefit that couldn’t have been entirely predicted at the time the image was published, but something I’d consider. Killing innocent civilians is never acceptable for the American public, even when it was accidental or caused by the fog of war. Hopefully the image will lead to some kind of change, stopping needless bloodshed in the future.

I think the image is extremely powerful because of its candid nature. It really gives the reader a sense of the tragedy at the scene, and gives a glimpse into what is really going on on the ground in Iraq. This powerful horror is something I don’t think can be conveyed in writing. Saying “the girl stood screaming, drenched in blood, a look of pierced the darkness beside her shrill screaming,” is not as powerful as just seeing the image.

As for the identity of a minor, and consent, I don’t think a five-year-old understands either concept. This is another ethical gray area that I’m hung up on. Because she doesn’t understand identity or consent, she’s in no position to assess the ramifications (for her) of the photo being published. She is entirely dependent upon media to weigh her interests against the social gain or truth that would come out of the image.

When Samar saw her photo six years later, she looked horrified. However, the article didn’t focus so much on how the photo had affected her life, but how the death of her parents still haunts her. The scars on her hands and psyche would still be there without the picture. I think that’s what really matters. Also, if she hadn’t seen the picture in the six years it had existed, it doesn’t seem like it impacted her in a hugely negative manner.

The tragedy happened whether or not the picture was taken. The SPJ code of ethics tells us to pursue the truth, and to show both sides of a story. This photo is absolute truth. In a war where a majority of the media is tightly controlled by US military interest, this is a brief and intense look from a different angle. A view through a small window pane at tragedy amongst tales of triumph. The image is so truthful, and so brave, it may be hard for the public to swallow. That’s why it needs to be published.

Assignment IV: Editing Adderall

To start, the story begins with a bunch of redundant paragraphs. It says students are buying Adderall from students with a prescription for the drug a few different times with different words. It also says Adderall is used to combat ADD/ADHD 5 more times than it needs to. In addition to cutting out the redundant information about its use, I think the article should go into more depth about the drug itself. Maybe include the actual chemical compound (Adderall is dextroamphetamine and amphetamine). What the molecules do in your brain, and how prolonged use can cause the averse side-effects that were mentioned When you're interviewing a doctor, it's probably a good idea to get more than just "Adderall is a mixture of amphetamines," from him. Getting the doctor to tell you about the side effects will add credibility to the article as well (rather than a Washington faculty website).

At the end of the story, the reporter botches the story in my opinion. He says Adderall is being abused at WSU and will continue. The whole article is spent saying it's a problem, and then the last quote makes it seem like it's not such a big deal, that the abuse of a prescription drug isn't as bad as others. I think it was good that the reporter got someone else's side of the argument, but I think it was too abrupt. Either insert that argument higher in the article, or flesh it out beyond one disruptive quote at the end of the paper.

Also, I don't think the reporter should have tried to explain the effects of the drug (as he tried to do many times). Saying "Adderall works as an energy enhancer" would be more credible if attributed to a real source.

I think the reporter should have spoken to Police as well, and maybe got their take on the abuse, penalties and regularity of the abuse.