In 12 May, 2008, there was an earthquake in Wenchuan, China. Actually, at that moment, i was in China and the whole country and people were astonished at this horrible earthquake and paid all the attention to Wenchuan. As a Chinese, I really felt sad and sympathetic for this catastrophe. Compared with the former  unexpected crises that happened before, the information spread as quickly as possible across the country and the world.

During those days, the national and local TV channels played the programmes nearly all about the latest information of the earthquake such as death toll, the road conditions and what resource was urgently needed. Although the traditional media spread the news as soon as possible, it was still slower than the Twitter (out of China for Twitter was blocked in China) and chinese microblog.

In this crisis, the public’s power made people together and helped the victims immediately. Once someone has any information about the earthquake, they would tweet it or post a status and everyone could know that. That information is really the “latest”. Actually, microblogs didn’t just play a role as a stage to spread the information, but also give victims more opportunities to find their missing families or friends. That’s what the traditional media is hard to realize.

And also, one feature of the microblog is that all the information is emotional and personal. We can feel the agony and pains they were suffering. We are together! And another feature is that nothing could be hidden on the microblog, i think. Because the victims are telling their true stories. For example, after the earthquake happened, the whole nation raised the money for the rescue, food, tents, etc. If the money and the goods didn’t give the victims, we would know. It’s a stage to censor the government to take the real actions.

So, if there is no microblog, there may be more victims. We know we can’t depend on government all the time, we should show our power and make our efforts. I’m a Chinese, we can mostly feel the microblog’s importance role in this event, for information is such public and clear, which is a great advance for the whole nation. And we are also relieved at the government’s action of publishing the information. It’s way better than their past performances.

At last, hope all the victims rest in peace. And the survivors can have a brand new start and a better life.

Krystin and Emma’s “Hitler Reacts” presentation compared an original clip from a movie to comical remakes of the same movie clip. The original movie clip was about Hitlers high command informing him about the failure to complete orders and the fall of the Third Reich.  The original clip is very serious with Hitler yelling at his high command.  Due to Hitlers serious tone, a woman starts to cry.  The mood in the original clip is not comical at all, rather quite serious.

The remakes of the clip make Hitler freaking out about non-serious topics. In one video presented by Emma and Krystin Hitlers high command tells him how his Xbox live account has been deleted. Hitler goes on to rant and rave about not having an xbox live account. Hitler refuses to listen to his high command about buying a Nintendo Wii.  Hitler acts as if it is the end of the world because his Xbox live account has been canceled.  Krystin and Emma explained that common internet users were the producers of these comical remakes.  They also explained that they went viral simply through their comical nature.

The presentation by Emma and Krystin had a few technical difficulties. However, when they got the video running, they got the class laughing.

“Hitler Reacts” is a series of Youtube parodies based off of a dramatic scene from the 2004 film Downfall. This movie focuses on the last ten days of Hitler’s life in his underground Berlin bunker, and his, along with his close confidents’ eventual suicide. The scene in particular that has gained so much notoriety shows Hitler’s reaction after the realization that he is going to lose the war.

With his incredible acting and close resemblance to the man himself, Bruno Ganz, (who plays Hitler in the movie) does a remarkable job of making this scene both expressive and suspenseful. Because of this scene’s power, it makes for a highly effective piece of comedy media when contrasted with ridiculous subtitles. Youtube enthusiasts soon caught on to this fact and started developing spoofs. The earliest known parody was uploaded by Youtube user DReaperF4 on August 10^th, 2006. This was subbed in Spanish, and showed Hitler fuming over a demo trial of Microsoft’s Flight Simulator X. Because of the popularity of this upload, the English subbed version was uploaded 20 days later. However, due to a copyright claim made by the film studio, the original video was deleted in December, 2009.

Since then, the popularity and frequency of uploads/views of this scene have skyrocketed. With subtitles in English, Spanish, Japanese, Chinese, and many other languages, this has become a phenomenon throughout the world. In fact, in April 2009, a Youtube channel named HitlerRantsParodies was created for the community to come together and share their creations. This channel remains with over 560 uploads and 29 million views.

For the most part viewers have been accepting of these videos, and looking at them through a positive light. Because they do involve such a controversial figure, it is expected for there to be some outrage from certain groups of people. However, for the most part these videos portray Hitler as an unstable and overdramatic figure, which parallels with the thoughts of his real-life actions in World War 2. In fact, even the director of Downfall had only positive comments to give about the parodies, finding them humourous himself. On January 15th, 2010, the director was interviewed by New York Magazine’s entertainment blog Vulture. When asked about the emergence of the parodies online, he stated:

Someone sends me the links every time there’s a new one…
I think I’ve seen about 145 of them! Of course, I have to put the sound down when I watch. Many times the lines are so funny, I laugh out loud, and I’m laughing about the scene that I staged myself! You couldn’t get a better compliment as a director.

This video is one of many that stretches the boundaries of acceptable content to be posted online. Similar to the “Shit Girls Say” outbreak in 2011, they both could be viewed as offensive. However, Youtube enthusiasts have gone to show that with a good sense of humour, even touchy subjects can be created into entertainment for millions.

By Lauren Friesen

(presentation by Krystin Ellis-McDermid, Emma Bratman)

Hitler is not commonly a person you talk about lightly and humor is almost never involved. Hitler the German Nazi leader from 1934 to 1945, who remained in power until he killed himself. Hitler was an oppressive leader responsible for the killing of millions of people or genocide.  The genocide known as The Holocaust resulted in about six million european deaths. The total number of victims of the Holocaust add up to about 11-17 million people.  This event is acknowledged as serious and devastating still till this day.

Parodies started emerging surrounding Hitler around 2006, two years after the movie about Hitler was released, Downfall in 2003. The Downfall is done completely in subtitles, this was the main appeal to video makers and internet users to begin to create parodies. One scene in the movie shows Hitler in complete upset as he has realized that the war is truly lost, this scene is what artist use to create parodies. Changing the English subtitles gave room for many interpretations of the movie and also humor. The parodies make Hitler seem that he has taken part in the popular culture that we live in now and is up to date with news, events, and mainstream gossip.

The increase in individuals making parodies grew quickly but 2010 there were thousands of videos. The New York Times during the popular peak of creation wrote an article influencing people to “keep up with the meme.” Creators of these parodies named themselves “Untergangers.” Popular videos include “Hitler got banned from Xbox” and “Hitler finds out pokemon aren’t real”.

The issue of controversy has raised questions among viewers but people seem to be okay with this. As long as the videos dodge the topics that hit a sore spot, like the Holocaust that is a very serious matter. The director of the film Downfall announced that he thinks the videos are funny and bring ironic humor to the film. He stated: The point of the film was to kick these terrible people off the throne that made them demons, making them real and their actions into reality. I think it’s only fair if now it’s taken as part of our history, and used for whatever purposes people like.”

In 2010 Youtube stopped planning bans on all parodies and even started placing ads to bring in revenue. An attorney stated,  “All the [Downfall parody videos] that I’ve seen are very strong fair use cases and so they’re not infringing, and they shouldn’t be taken down.”

A website that covers all of the memes and parodies is one click away from having humor at your hands. The parodies play to bring ironic humor and a twist on a serious matter. Check it out.

By Kaitlyn Wamsteeker

It’s April 16^th 2007. You’re a producer at NBC, where you’ve been working for the past 10 years. A package arrives at your desk. It’s already open; half of its contents are spilling out.

“Take a look at this, boss,” The young intern says, in between gasps for fresh air.

You pull out the contents: a 23 page article (at least you think it’s an article), a bunch of photos, and simple small, black flash-drive.

Curious to find out what the intern is so panicked about, you slide in the flash-drive as you look through the pictures that lie before you. They’re pictures of a young, verbal and animated man, holding fierce-looking weaponry. You’re confused. So you click on the videos inside the flash-drive… And what you see makes your head go cold.

“Where did this package come from?” You ask the intern.

“Virginia Tech.” He says. “What should we do, boss?” He asks, still quite visibly worried.

“The only thing we can.” You reply, “Contact the school.”

 …

On April 16^th 2007, 23 year old Seung- Hui Cho decided he had had enough. In a raid aimed at his fellow students in Virginia Polytechnic Institute, young Cho became the perpetrator and assassin behind the now infamous “Virginia Tech shootings”, which resulted in 33 deaths (including his own) and 25 injuries.

A presentation by Monika Tesiorowski and Rachel Goss during the 10:00am Journalism class took a closer look at this chilling massacre, and shed some light on the ways in which journalism is slowly changing into a socially constructed phenomenon.

“News was coming from multiple sources,” Said Monika and Rachel during their presentation, “The Collegiate Times, their Flickr page, their Twitter page… Wikipedia, however, brought them all together.”

Now if you’ve been following the weekly class presentations, you’ll notice this was the first time that Twitter was ever used to inform and connect media houses, which had no other means of obtaining first-hand information from the scene of the crime.

Tweets from the school newspaper such as:

“Gun shots reported- Coliseum Parking lot. Stay Inside. Secure doors. Emergency personnel responding. Call 911 for help.”

And:

“BREAKING: It appears one person is dead in the Coliseum parking lot. Washington Street and area are closed. #virginiatech”

kept media houses in the loop, as they themselves sent out tweets such as:

“Call our newsroom if you know anyone that goes to Virginia Tech” (WKBW)

And:

“Hey #vatech – looking to speak & get updates from students on campus” (Joe Danielewicz of CBS news).

What was the most surprising about this whole experience (to me, at least) was the efficiency with which this communication system worked. Within minutes, a dialogue between the media houses and students at Virginia Tech was on going and flowing, which provided a constant source of information for affected family members, the police, as well as the general public.

What I learned from this presentation was how much can be achieved when even the slightest amount of journalistic knowledge is present amongst a group of people; be they students, professionals in other fields, the general public… I learned that collaborative efforts such as this can add so much value to the amount and quality of information released and produced; and the fact that when put to good use, social websites such as Twitter and Facebook can actually be really beneficial.

Just a thought: What if basic journalism classes were free and open to the general public? What if UBC (for example), had more than this one journalism course in the entire Undergraduate system? Wouldn’t news circulation be so much better? Wouldn’t we have so much more to report? Hmmm…

Be blessed.

Joy.

Disclaimer: The introductory narrative might deviate slightly from the actual events at NBC,  but the general message and course of action reflect what actually took place. For more information, click here.

The tragic Virginia Tech shootings created change in not only gun control, but also in the way that news came from an area unreachable by the media. Twitter, Flickr, and Wikipedia’s coverage of the event together broke ground for ways in which news could be delivered.

For the first ever, Twitter was a major factor in the distribution of information during a time when there were many different rumours and facts that did not originate from Virginia Tech students. In today’s world we see a huge increase the availability of information from Twitter that has, in some cases, been responsible for the collapse of authoritarian leaders.

What struck me most about this presentation was that Twitter had a major role in the media’s coverage of the event. Back in 2007 I would have not expected Twitter to have an impact like that. Now everything is “tweetable”. Even games on the iPhone like Temple Run have an option in which you can tweet your high score. Twitter of course now is a way in which Journalist, Activists, and Presidents can issue statements and share facts about what is happening in the world today.

Flickr, which previously had been a photographer’s virtual gallery, was during the Virginia Tech, used as a form of publishing news in the way of photos. Students on the Virginia Tech campus were uploading pictures from their cameras onto Flickr and were using the website as a visual source of news that was at times presented more information than some tweets available. Flickr, which had previously not been identified as a way to gather images coming in from, a conflict area was suddenly thirsted into the spotlight.

Wikipedia which today’s is the starting point for anybody needing information on any subject was a kind of virtual battlefront of information. Being that the website can be edited by the public there was a lot of editing to do in regards to opinion being mixed in with fact.  Editors were responsible for keeping Wikipedia’s page void of any controversial opinions and published only facts about the event. The mass editing of the page was an interesting and incredible feat and is a testimony to Wikipedia’s principles.

Twitter, Flickr, and Wikipedia all influenced the flow information concerning the Virginia Tech shootings. Twitter and Flickr for the first time were used as sources of information rather than as online social hangouts. Wikipedia for the first time dealt with an outpour of information and an strive to only put out accurate unbiased facts. These sources were groundbreaking more for the future of Journalism.

-Matt Harris

Virginia Tech shooting of 2007 also known as the Virginia Tech Massacre, was not only a tragedy that caught the world’s attention but also marked the power of civilian journalism. The incident that resulted in the death of 32 students was broadcasted by almost all major international news agencies and echoed throughout the internet.

Police Officer at Virginia Tech

What made this incident so unique within the journalism industry was that mainstream media companies relied on Collegiate Times – Virginia Tech’s university newspaper – Flickr, Wikipedia and Twitter as primary sources of information; all of which can be considered civilian sources. Within minutes of the incident, the student run newspaper was bombarded with phone calls from news agencies from all around the country seeking for interviews, information and rights to pictures of the killer they have posted on their Flickr account. Both news agencies and concerned individuals were tuned in to Collegiate’s post which was being updated live as the incident unfolded.

Furthermore, civilians and journalists alike started a Wikipedia page highlighting the incident as they gather sources from verified Twitter feeds, broadcast news and first hand experiences. Within the hour of the incident, the page was edited over 8000 times by 2047 different editors. While countless authors were adding and removing inaccurate or bias information, regardless, validity of the information on the page soon became of question. Eventually, a Wikipedia administrator restricted the page to only allow editors with good credentials to edit the page so that the viewers would not be given false information.

Timelaps of Wikipedia Virginia Tech Massacre page

The tremendous amount of information provide from the civilian journalist population ended up being the driving force behind the whole story to the extent where the majority of information being broadcasted on mainstream media was extracted from civilian sources. Pictures from Collegiate’s Flickr account were shown on news broadcasts while anchors quoted Twitter feeds and  parts of Collegiate’s article.

The high reliance of news agencies on civilian journalists for the Virginia Tech Massacre incident proved civilian journalism to be a powerful source of information. Not only are civilian journalist able to report in locations where professional journalists are present. The sheer amount of civilian journalists allows for more information to be extracted with multiple points of views and first hand experiences. Although civilian journalism are often criticized in terms of their validity, Wikipedia’s counter measures to secure validity in the Virginia Tech incident proves that civilian journalism does have – to some extent – a way of fact checking and censoring invalid material.

This incident proved the power of civilian journalism and that although professional journalists seems to be the norm of where people retrieve their information, civilian journalist can also contribute a fare amount of information to our world where information is considered a valuable resource.

-Jimmy Feng

After being assigned to blog about the Virginia Tech Massacre, a mixture of emotions arose. First, there was an eerie feeling that surfaced since my previous blog post mentioned the Virgina Tech Shootings. Second, I had a sudden rush of attachment to the topic. In 2007 when the attacks occurred, my older sister was acting in a one-act play at the time called “Bang, Bang You’re Dead” which was based on the Columbine Massacre. Two years later, I had ended up doing the same play for my Theatre Arts class, which helped me better understand what goes on inside a school shooter’s mind.

After being informed with elaborate detail about school shootings through my involvement with Bang, Bang You’re Dead, it was interesting to hear about the Virginia Tech Massacre from a journalistic perspective.

One important theme that arose from the Virginia Tech Massacre is citizen journalism. A graduate student at Virginia Tech, Jamal Abarghouti recorded videos outside of Norris Hall where 30 were killed and 25 were wounded. Using the video camera on his cellphone, Abarghouti captured footage that displayed police offers’ reactions to the sound of gunshots coming from inside of the building. CNN’s I-report, “an initiative that allows people from around the globe to contribute pictures and video of breaking news stories from their own towns and neighborhood”, featured Abarghouti’s video and had 1.8 million hits within the span of one day. This video was also used by other news networks and frequently shown due to its audio recording of the gunfire.

Another significant aspect of the Virginia Tech Massacre was the use of social networking. News networks like CBS reached out to the public by tweeting whether any of their followers had any information concerning the shooting. Though, there was also a downfall in the use of social networking to get information. After listening to the NPR interview with the editor-in-chief of the Collegiate Times, Virginia Tech’s student newspaper, I learned about how a student reporter was finding more information on the event via Facebook. The editor in chief encouraged the reported to be critical of the information found on Facebook as it may not always be reliable.

Something I found particularly interesting in researching the Virginia Tech Massacre is that its impact still remains significant today. I literally mean today. An article from the Associated Press was released from Richmond on March 9^th outlining the civil suit surrounding the Virginia Tech Massacre. Parents of the deceased sued the university for not issuing a school-wide announcement earlier that the shootings had occurred. The first shooting occurred at 7:15 and there was no campus-wide alert that happened until 9:26 am. Virginia Tech President Charles Steger testified, “I tried my best.” The US education department fined Virginia Tech $55,000 in damages which the school is appealing.

Personally I feel that issuing a campus-wide alert was necessary but it is a sticky situation to be in when a shooting has occurred. Obviously the last thing you want is the swarm of reporters storming your campus and fuelling the fire. But the well being of the students should be the utmost priority. Though it was not only the President of the school who was put in a difficult position.

Journalistically speaking, reporters were put in a tough spot as they were putting stories out with faces of victims that their families may not have wanted to be put on the news. I feel that although the media tend to sensationalize school shooting stories, these events do need to be broadcasted for public information.

Frances Young

On April 16^th, 2007 between 7:15 am and 9:50am, a massacre took place on the campus of “Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia, United States”. First shooting occurred at West Amber Johnston hall, which killed 2 students. Between attacks, Seung Hui Cho sent a video package to NBC News. Approximately two hours later, a 2^nd attack occurred at the Norris hall. This took lives of 30 people, and 25 were wounded. After the shooting, Seung Hui Cho committed suicide. Virginia Tech massacre became one of the worst tragedies of murder on college students. We are not sure about his motivation but the police found a note in his room. It said, “You caused me to do this”. During the investigation, the police discovered few more information about Seung Hui Cho. They found out that he previously had mental health treatments. Also, “fellow students described Cho as a quiet person who would not respond if someone greeted him.” He had no socializing skills in his life.

New media played an important role in spreading this murder tragedy. When the massacre took place between 7:15 am to 9:50am, new media such as Twitter and Wikipedia were kept updated from students of Virginia Tech University. Students used their cell phones to take videos and photographs and shared to the public about what was going on in the campus. In Twitter, people posted statuses such as, “Gun shots reported coliseum parking lot stay inside” and “Secure doors emergency personnel responding call 911 for help”. People updated their twitters every minute with new pictures and reports.  In Wikipedia, pages were also created for each victims and the shooter in order to keep an Encyclopedia layout. There were 2075 editors who took on roles as editors or spell checkers without anyone supervising or organizing it. During first two days after the incident, there were 750000 visits on Wikipedia, which equals to 4 visits per second. This shows the power of new media. However, this can have a negative effect on family members of the victims who would not want to know how their child got killed.

South Koreans were shocked and shameful when the citizenship of the shooter was identified as South Korea. President of South Korea Roh Moo-Hyun expressed his deepest sympathy.  Even though Seung Hui Cho came to the US as a 10 years old boy and also a permanent resident of the US, a lot of South Koreans felt guilty, sorrowful, and apologetic to the world because they considered him as South Korean by blood.  South Korean living in the US feared that there might be another reprisal attack.

What I think of Virginia tech massacre is that it should not happen again at any place around the world. Also, we should take care of people who might have similar personality of Seung Hui Cho. We need to approach to them first and handle them with care and friendliness. We should also talk with them about their difficulties in their lives and find out ways to help them.

In this post I will be examining how new media such as Twitter and Wikipedia play a role in the way spree murder tragedies are covered by the mass media. In the case of the Virginia Tech shooting, there were a number of on-site reports being spread via twitter, feeding and bolstering the coverage by international broadcast news associations. Cell phone photographs and videos served to feed the public’s interest in the carnage that was unfolding on campus, every minute a new terrifying image or twitter update chilling them to the bone. 24 hour broadcasts became satiated with these images and reports, the mass media attempting to milk the tragic story for all it’s worth. These tactics are not just exploitative, but prove to cause a number of copy-cat murder cases within the coming weeks and months.

Charlie Booker addressed the issue on his Newswipe broadcast, highlighting the way nonstop media coverage of the issue serves no purpose but to satisfy the public’s interest in being entertained by the news. The video shows a BBC interview with Dr. Park Dietz, a forensic psychologist, who maps out the problems with the media’s coverage of the events. Some of the issues include plastering news broadcasts with images of the killer and giving body counts, which only serve to portray the killer as a sort of anti-hero.

Mass media often attempts to shift the focus from those who were murdered onto the murderer’s reason for committing the crime. Many reports seek to delve deep into the killer’s psyche in an attempt to pinpoint the factors that are to blame. One example of this would be the Columbine massacres, where media focused largely on the external influences that would have caused the killers to go on their murderous rampage. Michael Moore addresses this in his documentary Bowling for Columbine. 

“Presumably he wanted to make a name for himself, which is why I won’t identify him. His name deserves to be forgotten. Discarded. Deleted. Labels like “madman”, “monster”, or “maniac” won’t do, either. There’s a perverse glorification in terms like that. If the media’s going to call him anything, it should call him pathetic; a nothing.”
– Charlie Booker on the Oslo bomber