Writing Your Opinions: When and How in Journalism

Just started reading another book called Nefertiti by Michele Moran, and so fart I'm not all that enticed about it. I bought the book a few years ago, and I just gotten up to reading it now ( I buy quite a lot of books, and in-return,,read them when I have the time, I like to think of it as having a micro library in my room,me hearer I can go through and find a book from whenever, and read it at my own time and pace.) all my books are eventually read, but I'm never short on something to read. Though I think it's time for another major purchase, because I'm down to just a few books left untouched, so now I go out and buy a good thirty books, donate or keep the ones I've read, and the wintry cycle begins again. I still have a few Edward Rutherford books at my disposal, and reading one of them takes quite a while. I don't read extremely fast, never had in my life the urge to read at a cheetah' space. I read quite fast, but not two books a day fast, but I suppose if you had six-eight hours of nonstop speed reading,one could read two average-length novels in a day, but not necessarily retain everything you read. Most people read for both school, and for work, so downtime reading is usually spent on such things as a magazine, or a few blog posts, and that seems like the normal for many of this generation's readers. Of course, nobody turns down their nose at a free eBook, but even still, they tend to be much shorter in length than the common published novel. I admit that I don't read many eBooks on Amazon, but the few I've picked up, they seem relatively well put, despite the annoyances of seeing what people underlined, as if I care if two-hundred people found a certain passages interesting. Then again, this is a simple system of communication between writer and reader,where the author can see what the people like about a certain passage of the novel, but in it's primitive state, this gesture of highlighting a certain area can also be used for a negative effect. Negative commentary is now far more the norm, and the cynical posts made on boards, it was easily foreseeable that one anonymity was the standard, the truth would be much harsher than it was say twenty-five years ago, for a fair estimate. Of course, I do find the majority of posts on Amazon.com about s certain product, or a certain book, seem to be honest,accurate, and some could be a thesis in how long they are! I don't find the tussling of online criticism to be all that haphazard to the actual book, it seem the general notion is that if it doesn't suck much, then it tends to be an overall good book. I'm sure there's someone out there who would hate a classic like Of a ice and Men, and sure at the time of it's publishing, there were some negative reviews listed, but most of us who read it objectively, find it to be a decent piece of literature, and not act so snobby about what if could've been, why it's undeserving, why it is deserving, etc., but the truth is that we simply like, dislike, or utterly polarize media, both old and new. I tend to think that we all love certain things that other people hate, and if we go around deciding to only like what other people like, and think how they think then really, are we really allowed to believe our opinions are any more deserving than others? By-the-way, I read much further into Nefertiti, and it's turning out a bit better than I've expected, slower pace at the beginning, but I'm note through it just yet. I'm at page 213 right now, so I'm almost halfway through, and it's a much more rousing experience than I've expected. Not saying for sure if I'll love it, or dread it, but it's appealing to me, so far. Opinions matter only because we believe they matter, it's in entirely up to us to take a broad, or narrow opinion to heart, and even more our choice if we decide to let that opinion dictate how we read, or watch films or television, and it is through this dictation that we tend to see what is good, and what isn't, because we trust past experience to ward us off from a potential bad experience. However, we do not truly know of that experience will be to our liking until we've actually experienced it, thus dismissing any actual cause for opinions, but somehow we psychologically believe that one person's experience is going to speak for us all, as if we've been linked to each other, like some invisible psychic tether. We are not all the same, and no matter how hard people push that we are, it's simply not true, especially when it comes to tastes. It seems that criticism is read now so it can be gaffed at, and persecuted for ever going against the individual's opinion, which is itself of no consequence. For years I've used to think that people and their opinions ran the world, and for a while, I didn't care. I didn't care if people would judge me for how I've looked, how I've dressed, and so-on. I never judged those who were different, rarely have I ever gone with the crowd on things, but I don't base my opinions on your opinions, because I simply believe that deep down, and though I'm respect enough to be approachable, I truly do not have to justify myself to anyone, nor should I ever have to defend an opinion or belief, but that's a way of debasing any argument. I know now that really, it's comments, critiques, and "likes" that rule the world, as if they hold merit outside of anything but their chosen medium. I find it disgruntling that I have to ever defend my opinion to those who believe they are of some importance. In-truth, none of us are truly that important enough to ever warrant an explanation, and we should be grateful that anyone would humor us! Don't get me wrong, obviously most of us believe we have some value that is above the norm, and for a select few of us, it's true. However, for the majority,which includes myself, it means nothing to share an opinion. Indeed, it hurts to be told that your opinion is of no consequence,that it is as minimal as another anonymous five-star rating, but we tend to believe we are holier than thou, and it is really nice to fool oneself, but I feel that real greatness comes from when you're told that you can either be better, or be basic, and guess what? Most of is, even those with a voice, are basic, and that is okay. Now, this does not constitute having a goal, achieving it, because that is not usually based on some criticism, unless you're a critic, and that is far more than having fanciful words backing up your "intellectual" opinion. Criticism is like arguing a point, but making the other side's point just as validated, so then your point strives to win over an audience far more than the status quo. A great example would be for a liberal critic to review a conservative work, or vice-versa. Sorry to politicize this, but frankly it's all that seems to matter to most people, so don't fix what isn't broken, I say. Anyhow, if the book of one side is relatively thought out with furtive research, and draws great attention to the subject, and is readable, but goes against all your core values, then explain to me just how you give that a fair review? Say, and this is hyper theoretically speaking, but let's say Sarah Palin on a comeback tour for 2016 publishes a book early January of 2015, and it is by-far the greatest piece of political writing of the 21st century so -far, and validates her as a primary candidate for the Republican Party (again, extremely hypothetical here, I'd believe Satan himself would come dancing out of California with a parade of skeletons behind him before this ever becomes reality.) and you, a lifelong Democrat with so far left ties, you're practically Stalin without the mustache and vodka breath, have to right an unbiased account on the book? How do you do it? Do you arrogantly turn down work, for standards? Or do you really try to be objective? Remember, too-good of a review, and you could single-ha deadly sway voters, especially if they've know your political views as a public reviewer. However, if you simply condemn the book, because of political beliefs, that could also hurt the faith many voters have in the media,,which is an earthquake of seismic proportions already! So how do you approach a touchy subject? This is a big-time paper you're reviewing for in this scenario, world-wide syndication, so imagine how you will have to approach this, and of course you could say well, the papers are crooked either way, so just damn the book for the halibut, right? (Yes, I wrote halibut to be cute, because I'm a Grade A prick, sorry.) Or do you actually judge the book on its merits, because your politics are strong, but not above your sense of objective criticism? Or you simply pass the review off to someone more of that leaning? Either way, seems a damning circumstance to be an honest reviewer, because it is a classic Catch-22, and although you'd hate to look like you've gone against your personal beliefs, in-the-end you learn that doing something distasteful as writing a positive review for the other side, no matter the disgust, will make you see that you may have to leave the bitching at home, and do the job. I think most people can handle that, but I find so many who think opinion is important. Granted, I do reviews here, but I don't go out of my way to say you must play, or buy, or agree. Nevertheless, I don't see the value of my opinion, if it helps, I'm glad, if it entertains, I'm also happy, but I don't think people should make a rash decision based on anyone's personal rants, because 1: you don't know if they have an ulterior motive, such as a hatred for a certain brand, e.g., someone commenting on Halo that personally hates Halo the video game, and will condemn it despite having such a cynical view on the game. 2: the mindset the person was in when they wrote the said review; because they could be upset, angry, or detached, and really are venting their frustrations out on a My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic box set. Or3: they simply are trolling and thinking that their opinion will dupe you into believing something is good, when it it's bad, or vice-versa. Either way, tread lightly, don't let opinions affect you, because in hindsight, nothing someone else says matters, and truthfully, most people will damn anything for the sake of damning. Thank you for reading the Malacast Editorial! Twitter: Twitter.com/mcasteditorial or @mcasteditorial E-mail: mcasteditorial@yahoo.com More posts coming soon! Including the annual State of Games post for next week. It's a long one so you might want to hunker down.

The Perspective of Modern Journalism Decoded

If it isn’t obvious, I’m a blogger. I write posts for the internet that are read by people all around the world, and I keep it updated weekly. I have archives which are still visited from years back, some of which I’m even surprised are still being read. I even (as of recently) have put ads on my website, which I was not entirely proud of, but figured it was worth a shot. So, am I a journalist? I have all the qualifications as any other website that brings media to a demographic via posts (articles) and I have sponsorship built into the website that gives me whatever I need to make my site look the best that it can, which is not always easily done. So do I count as a journalist along the lines of those working at say, Breitbart.com, NYTimes.com, or even the Huffington Post? I believe so, and here’s why: Firstly, I know there are absolutely no true comparisons to myself and the above mentioned websites, but I do have something in common with them that most people fail to forget: my website is about taking multimedia information to a targeted demographic, and having that spread out through multiple devices, like Twitter, or Pinterest, but mostly through advertising through social media, and affiliates of my site (Google, Blogger, etc.) I could even use video-sharing to get more of an audience, the possibilities are endless. Another issue I see with the current generation of journalism is the use of opinionated writing, rather than hard-lined facts with no serious bias. Very robotic writing that once used to plague every “grandpa” paper that existed back in the days of printed news. Let’s face it: aside from lining our bird cages, do we actually have a use for newspapers? (Random thought: why hasn’t someone become a billionaire yet selling newspaper paper without print on it as bird cage lining for cheap? That alone would be the final nail in the coffin for printed news. If you think I’m insane for stressing that point, I guarantee whoever reads this first has just become a multimillionaire). Again, opinions in the news are now the standard; everyone has to put in their slanted view to every single story, and not even ironically, it is considered the norm, and I do blame the likes of digital media, and television news for this trend. Granted, the news was always a bit bias, even back before the Internet was just a prenatal fetus in the womb of the digital mainstream. Yet, back then it was a bit harder to catch, or at the very least they weren’t so blatantly political. I’m all for an exchange of ideas, I love analytical commentary, but do you really have to explain why the Senate is full of crooks, and Obamacare is the end of civilization when it comes to a story about a cat stuck in a tree? Do I really have to hear that on a daily basis? No thank you! If this is the first time you’re reading this blog, thank you for the support, and welcome! I hope you’ll come back, and click on every single ad you see now a billion times over (I’m kidding, obviously) but here’s the deal, the one thing that separates my modest little site that is in the dark crevices of the Internet, and Big Print that makes me look like an ant. My form of journalism is completely editorial, no filler whatsoever…or all filler, however you view modern journalism. Yes, I do believe myself to be a journalist, and why not? Have you seen the trash they print? They refuse to even use spell check anymore! They don’t even let the keyboard cool down before the article is put up online without even a fact check behind it! Why not be honest and call news as it is today what it truly is: theater without the Playbill. When I was younger, I always wanted to be a writer, and thanks the to the internet, I now have the luxury of being read all around the world. I’m extremely humbled by that honor, and realistically, twenty years ago, when a young eight-year-old boy was still learning how write a proper story, that would have been the pinnacle of my life. Today, that is just start for most writers, and it shows just how far we’ve come as a society. Writing was my dream, but multimedia has become my goal. I truly am humble for every single reader I receive, and I know I pronounce it ad-nauseum in nearly every single blog post I put up, but that’s what separates me again from my Big Print counterpart: I’m human, and I know without all of you, those who have been here for nearly ten years, I’d not be doing this weekly. Nowadays we write on tablets by pressing fingers to touch-sensitive glass, we can use phones to take digital pictures on the spot of any major newsbreak. We are the media today, and that makes us something greater than the Old Media, because we do it with a humanity that has been loss, and with a power that can topple dictatorships, and even start a revolution that splits a country in two. I find myself looking to blogs for information more often than I do newspapers. Twitter has become the best tool for finding information, because I can read all the newspapers I admire at once, plus blogs that I’ve been reading for years, and why not? That is the great thing about technology isn’t it? Get what you want as fast as you want, no filler? Without Twitter, and Monday Blogs, my blog would still be floating around in the digital mainframe, lost amongst more than a trillion upcoming blogs from hundred of countries. Freedom of speech is spread so far and wide, that tyranny could never stifle it, and that also means that the powers that be in Big Print are always going to deny the likes of little old me, but they fail to forget that they will either adapt to the new ways, or fall backwards into primordial stew, fossilizing, and thrown into museums of yesteryear media. I consider myself a journalist, even though that’s a bad word these days, I respect its connotations. I believe my site brings people enjoyment, informative entertainment that would rather have been filled by something perhaps less productive, like cat videos. (I am not against cat videos, who doesn’t love cats, right?) but still, I try to give my insight (product) to those willing to listen, and I know that is all I can offer in this field. What else would you want? Journalism today is about learning how to write for the media of television, papers, blogs, and on the rarest occasion: forums. Then you relearn everything (or in most cases, forget everything you learn) and then you go off to a dying medium that most people have lost their trust in, because the media was once a check on the lies and deceits that come from the mouths of politicians, businessmen, and so-called “freedom fighters”. They never had an agenda, because they used to care about exposing the truth, no matter how decrepit, disgusting, how horrific it may be. They weren’t afraid to go into war zones and risk their lives to make sure you saw the horrors of battle, in hopes we never have to go through that trauma again. Today, they do commentary on the president blowing his nose, or pouring a beer that overflows, or a former First Lady having a shoe thrown at her head. This is why I people like Edward Snowden are true heroes to me, and the talking head on the screen that brings me news about cats that can tap dance are faces of teeth that wouldn’t know a breaking news story if it cracked them right in that manufactured pearly white mandible of theirs. Edward Snowden forced the news to do its job, and it got America talking about our rights, and how we’ve been asleep so long that they’ve disappeared from right underneath our oblivious feet some night long ago. I bet that I could talk to most high school students, and they couldn’t tell me who the hell Sojourner Truth was, but I guarantee they at least would nod like comatose tech zombies if I muttered the syllables Edward Snowden. Media has been dying for years, because we have become the commune of media: with blogs becoming more noteworthy than newspapers, Twitter being better than a ticker at the bottom of the corporate newscasts (the only redeeming quality their was for television news) why not declare myself a journalist? I have been through the channels most people go through to become a journalist, or to work in a news studio, but I saw the future of the internet being the true media, and unless something greater comes along, or an EMP puts us back to the days of Johannes Gutenberg, there is no need for Old Media. People have to now do research, where they just obeyed their corporate headmasters of the past, and took every word coming out of the pretty person’s mouth for truth. We now search out news, because it comes from the source we can best relate to: ourselves. Journalism is now our scapegoat, it will always come under scrutiny, because we have never before in our history had such a distrust in both our politicians, and the corporate mongers who are in their pockets in the news media. Obviously I am not a news blogger, because I have a soul, and I know that there is no pleasing half a nation, so I try my best to avoid politics, and I don’t always do that well, but I try. Besides, I find it’s unfair for my international readers who are clearly not going to care as much for American news. So I speak the international language of digital media. I scrutinize most media, and I try to show some integrity, even when I happen to be bias. Then again, I also know that if a company makes a shit product, and I’ve supported them in the past, you can bet your life’s savings that I will be tearing that company a new one. I try to be humble, but I also have integrity. Let’s discuss one last aspect of modern journalism that tends to be missing: the ability to write. I’ve always believed writing is more a gift, than something that can be taught. Spewing beautiful allegories, and prose that comes out of your fingers that almost feels divine is not something you can just learn overnight, it’s something that comes from thousands of hours of discipline. The new media allow for this to be taken into consideration, where word count would limit free-flowing prose before. Granted, I don’t want ten lines of alliteration whenever a terrorist is captured, or a rhyming couplet at the end of analysis of the president’s speech, but there is no doubt there’s a quality of writing not seen before sprouting up in many hard-line news posts. Just look at how many more colloquialisms we have in news articles, and witty double-entendres in editorials than there have been in all of modern American news writing. Everything written almost feels like it was supposed to be posted in a forum for debate, and the fact is: most of the time, it is! Everything written is now under constant scrutiny. You cannot ever write a story, and expect it to just go away into the background the next day. People keep topics and articles alive now with commentary, and you will either have to keep up with it all, putting more detail into a thousand word article than you ever thought possible, or ignore every single comment, criticism, or outright enraged rant that comes your way. The internet has forced the lines that separate the celebrity from the fan to the point where a verified account means your message will most likely reach the individual you’re projecting those feelings toward. For that reason, Twitter is one of the greatest inventions, because it limits your thirty-paragraphs rants, but are short enough that the average person could read a thousand tweets in a day, and feel like it was barely an effort. Even if someone sends you two thousand tweets daily, it takes less than five seconds to read a single tweet (obviously if it has a tinyurl, or a link, that it takes longer to read the full details of that tweet.) 140 characters will become the normal amount for a response, and that give even the most carpal tunnel hands the ability to answer without feeling the pressure of writing a full-open statement. I’ve already written enough to equal at least several hundred tweets, and most likely I’ll have nearly a thousand tweets done before I finish writing this article. Incredible how journalism is now in our hands, and in-truth, it has been for some time now. The likes of independent news sources actually hiring directly from the colleges, taking away students that would go to those jobs in Old Media outlets, and most likely be fired within the same year as their “golden opportunity” first arises, you’ll find that those who go and work at the independent outlets will most likely have longer careers than their Old Media counterparts. Big Print isn’t very happy about this, because they refuse to change, and journalism has truly not changed in source gathering since yellow journalism spread far and wide enough to become what was expected of most newspapers. Pulitzer was the start of the corruption, the cancer of which all newspapers lost the integrity to tell even the most truth-bearing news stories, and the digital media is now the cure for that cancer. You don’t have to agree with me on this, and I’m sure this will expunge many critics to say I don’t know jack about news media, that I don’t even spread newsworthy posts. That may be true, but I also have been through the depths of most journalism classes, I have done years of research into Mass Media, Digital Media, even the history of our corrupt news organizations. Trust me, I know news, and I know that the people are barely getting the facts on a daily basis, let-alone the respect and integrity they deserve. 9/11 was a tragedy, it was the worst attack on American soil since 1993’s bombing, and dwarfs even the attacks of Pearl Harbor, but the only good thing that came out of it (and I say this very, very lightly, because I know the wounds of this travesty have not healed. I mean no disrespect to the victims and families) is that we now are actively searching out the truth more often, and we criticize harsher than ever before. Yes! We are making your cushy jobs harder, “journalists”, because we’re no longer taking the fodder you spew at us on a constant basis as truth. I despise the Huffington post, and Slate, but even they are now better examples of news than CNN, FOX, MSNBC and CNBC combined. Even Breitbart.tv, VICE, and Taki-Mag are far more entertaining than the dribble that comes out of Charlie Rose’s mouth. It has become so bad, I search for news on Ariang and CCTV. BBC News is the last great frontier of Western news, and don’t get me started on Al-Jazeera. So what better alternatives are out there? At least we can directly affect a load of B.S. online by calling foul on these internet sources, Journalism is dead, let’s ring in the people, who are showing that news isn’t just a job for the elite, it isn’t only the blue blooded calorie corporations that can write down facts, and it proves that we still are the most powerful check on the powers that be, as they strive to steal more of our rights, our money, and our dignity. I am Malacast Agent, I am a journalist, an outlier that has no axe to grind, no political affiliate, and I know my main job is to inform, while entertaining. I know my opinion is my bond, and my poise on the digital media is what keeps you returning to read this site. I am as much a journalist as anyone with an opinion, and perhaps more because that opinion isn’t bought and sold by anyone. Maybe I’ll be a sellout one day, we eventually all will, but at least I have my dignity today…and not a penny to show for it. Journalism isn’t about the money, it was always about the truth, but today, hopefully, it will come down to corruption on all accounts being ousted, and we will finally get the truth, but change takes forever, no matter the entity. Thank you for reading the Malacast Editorial, you can follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/mcasteditorial, or you can send me a message: @mcasteditorial. You can send me an E-mail: mcasteditorial@yahoo.com, or FB me: Malacast Agentt (with two Ts, although I’m rarely ever on. As always, thank you for the constant support, to my domestic and international readers. I’m forever thankful for everyone that comes back weekly to read me, and I hope you’re enjoying the blog. I don’t get much feedback, so that tends to make me think I’m either doing a great job, or barely worth your time, but I’ll try to remain optimistic. Have a great week everyone, please come back every Monday for my Monday Blogs post, and don’t forget to follow Monday Blogs on Twitter as well for the most up-to-date blogs, posted every single Monday!