​At last, we have finally arrived at the final blog post for the Journalism 150 course. It has been a great semester. I happen to be a communication major and did not realize that this course was based around mass communication until the semester had started so I was happy to be able to learn a little more about my major in a journalism course that I was not quite expecting to tie into my major. The industry we will be looking at in this blog post is the social media industry, as of late I have been very into social media with the COVID-19 outbreak because I really have nothing else to do aside from working out and schoolwork. Now with the semester ending, my use of social media will most likely increase even more. The social media industry allows people around the world to connect with each other in unique ways. The social media industry also allows news to be spread in ways that have never been conducted before. Social media has even allowed people to watch sports on a few different social media platforms. Since the beginning of the introduction of social media, the industry has changed a lot since then and some of these changes have been beneficial, and some of these changes have been not been too beneficial. Overall, these changes that have been made since the introduction have lead to the fact the social media industry or just social media in general has developed into a very essential part to everyday to life and reaps many benefits however, these benefits come with some negatives but the benefits that social media brings do outweigh the negatives that the industry brings. Social media and it's industry has gone from a simple yet very efficient way of contacting people anywhere to a very powerful, if used correctly, tool in today's society. 

The beginning of social media can be traced back as far as the year of 1844. According to Irfan Ahmad of SocialMediaToday, “Samuel Morse made the first steps towards some resemblance of social media when he sent a telegraph from Washington D.C. to Baltimore. Morse’s first message read “What have God wrought”” (Ahmad). Another one of the very first types of social media was launched by France in 1980.  According to John Pavlik and Shawn McIntosh of Covering Media, “In 1980, France launched its videotext  service—test delivery over the air or by cable for presentation on television screens or other electronic displays—known them as Teletel and later as Minitel” (McIntosh, Pavlik, 196). As we can see, the purpose of social media has always remained the same since the very first types of social media being introduced with the purpose being to communicate with people in unique technological ways. These types of social media lead to the emergence of types of social medias such as email and chat rooms. Chat rooms and email have allowed people to contact with each other more directly over the internet. These platforms come with their side effects, however. Things such as spam which is “unwanted mass emailing from advertisers” (McIntosh, Pavlik, 198). These spam messages could even be scam messages in order to deceive people in order to gain money and private information such as social security numbers and such. While the social media industry was active well before one might think, the industry did not really start to boom until the mid-2000s. The first prominent social media platform to break the surface would be Facebook in 2005 (McIntosh, Pavlik, 204). As we all know, Mark Zuckerberg created Facebook during his time at Harvard University. But what some people may not know is that Facebook was not used the way it is today originally. When Facebook was first developed, it was more for students to connect with their professors at colleges all around the United States. For reference, Facebook was more like Edmodo in its early years (McIntosh, Pavlik, 204). Following Facebook, YouTube was launched in 2005, and Twitter was launched in 2006 (McIntosh, Pavlik, 204). Instagram was launched in 2010 (Instagram.com). Since then, the social media industry has evolved every year.

Today, the social media industry today is the second most popular industry in the world behind television (medialandscapes.org). In fact, “Today around seven-in-ten Americans use social media to connect with one another, engage with news content, share information and entertain themselves.” (pewresearch.org). In the context of politics, the social media industry really serves as a place for people to express and share their political beliefs. A lot of movements fighting against racial injustice are played out on social media platforms. In July 2013, Jordan Zimmerman, a white male, was acquitted of charges for the murder of Trayvon Martin, a black male. In response to this, people fled to Twitter and used the hashtag “#BlackLivesMatter” (Bonilla, Rosa, 12) in order to spread awareness of the clear case of racial injustice that had just occurred. Surprisingly, this up rise against something so horrific actually received backlash from some members of Twitter. People simply did not understand the hashtag. These people read it as “black lives are superior to other lives, when the hashtag really meant “black lives matter just as much as any other life”. (Bonilla, Rosa, 12). In the context of politics, the social media industry can be a great place to spread awareness for causes that is near and dear to most to everyone’s heart, but there are always going to be people who disagree with these causes and with that disagreement and even misunderstanding, create even more conflict. The social media industry in the context of economics can be considered to be a gold mine. In today’s world we use social media excessively, as “today’s consumer spends up to nine hours per day online” (LaHaye). Because of that, “social media has proven to be the most effective way for businesses to reach new audiences on a global scale.” (LaHaye). To me there are no downsides to the social media industry in the context of economics, as it has opened up so many opportunities. According to Felix LaHaye of adweek.com, “Social media is also helping to fuel the global economy by creating new jobs, democratizing information and pushing brands far beyond their borders.” (LaHaye). In the context of society, the social media industry may not be as beneficial as everyone suspects. Jacob Amedie of Santa Clara University wrote a scholarly article highlighting the negative impacts that the social media industry has had on society. In his article, Amedie mentions that “Several researchers have proposed a new phenomenon called “ ‘Facebook depression’, which is defined as depression that develops when individuals spend an excessive amounts of time on social media sites, such as Facebook, and then begin to exhibit classic symptoms of depression.” (Amedie, 7). The social media industry also brings about stress on society. According to Jacob Amedie, “social media is also a common source of stress to its users” (Amedie, 9), and that “Another survey performed on 7,000 mothers, found that 42% of mothers using the photo-sharing site Pinterest, reported occasionally suffering from Pinterest Stress” (Amedie, 9). Social media is a great tool for society to use in many different ways, but it can also be mentally damaging. Social media and technology have seemed to develop at the same pace. Back when social media first began to gain attention, it was nothing more than just a way for people to communicate with others essentially, which is what technology was if you think about phones, computers, and television. Now social media has caught up to a technology such as television because social media can provide entertainment just like television does. However, just like we discussed in the society context, social media can be mentally damaging. Social media can cause people to become addicted to technology and developing the symptoms of excessive use of technology previously mentioned (Anderson, Jiang, 4). In the context of culture, social media can be very powerful. According to Frank Furedi of the aspen review, “The Internet and social media are very powerful tools that can influence and shape human behavior. The social media has played a significant role in recent outbreaks of social protest and resistance.” (Furedi). Social media can help push for changes, but it can also change human behavior, which is not always a very good thing.

​If I were to provide an outlook on social media and the social media industry it would be that we have developed a very powerful tool for today’s society and culture. Social media can be used to inform, entertain, and fight for causes. But social media needs to be used carefully as we learned with the side effects of excessive use of technology. The industry is powerful, so powerful that it can cause one’s mental well being to take massive hit in a negative way.

Looking back, we saw how social media first started. Social media was first mainly a way to communicate with others directly, which was plain and simple. No real harm to the people doing it. Then came the mid to late 2000s when the industry started to boom with many different social media platforms designed to have people interact with each other and even more people at once but while this is great for a society that needs efficient communication like any living organism needs water, it does bring some pretty harmful side effect to the table. But overall, if social media is used properly, then the positives will always outweigh the negatives. From here, I do not really see the industry changing in anyway. The only way I see the industry changing is if ways to limit the amount of time people use it are created so we can cut down on mental health issues caused by the use of social media.

-“About Us: Official Site.” Instagram, about.instagram.com/about-us.
 
-Ahmad, Irfan. “The History of Social Media [Infographic].” Social Media Today, 27 Apr. 2018,
www.socialmediatoday.com/news/the-history-of-social-media-infographic-1/522285/.
 
-Amedie, Jacob, "The Impact of Social Media on Society" (2015). Advanced Writing: Pop
Culture Intersections. 2. https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/engl_176/2
 
-Anderson, Monica, and JingJing Jiang. “Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018.” Pew
Research Center, 2018, pp. 1–10.
 
-Bonilla, Yarimar, and Jonathan Rosa. “#Ferguson: Digital Protest, Hashtag Ethnography, and t
he Racial Politics of Social Media in the United States.” American Ethnologist, vol. 42,
no. 1, 15 Jan. 2015, pp. 4–17., doi:10.1111/amet.12112.
 
-“Demographics of Social Media Users and Adoption in the United States.” Pew Research
Center: Internet, Science & Tech, Pew Research Center, 12 June 2019,
www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/.
 
-Furedi, Frank. “How Internet and Social Media Are Changing Culture.” Aspen Institute Central
Europe, Apr. 2014, www.aspenreview.com/article/2017/internet-social-media-changing-
culture/.
 
-LaHaye, Felix. “The Digital Gold Rush: How Social Media Fuels the Economy.” Adweek,
Adweek, 2 Apr. 2018, www.adweek.com/digital/the-digital-gold-rush-how-social-media-
fuels-the-economy/.
 
-Pavlik, John V., and Shawn McIntosh. Converging Media: a New Introduction to Mass
Communication. Oxford University Press, 2019.

The foreign country we will be looking at for this blog post will be Italy. I am 25% Italian, so it was easy to pick this country. Italy’s culture structure is based around the arts, food, music, architecture, and family. According to thelocal.it, Italy’s political structure is “is a constitutional republic.” (thelocal.it). According to focuseconomics.com, “Italy is the world’s ninth biggest economy. Its economic structure relies mainly on services and manufacturing.” (focuseconomics.com). According to bbc.com, “Mr. Berlusconi's Mediaset owns Italy's top private TV stations, and the public broadcaster, Rai, has traditionally been subject to political influence, so that when Mr. Berlusconi was prime minister, he was able to exert tight control over both public and private broadcasting.” (bbc.com). Also included in the bbc.com article is “Rai and Mediaset dominate the TV market and are a potentially powerful political tool, especially as 80% of the population is said to rely on TV for daily news. Sky Italia has a near monopoly of the pay-TV sector.”. (bbc.com). Italy’s media is not exactly owned by the government but most of it is owned by a former government official.

Medialandscapes.org describes Italy’s media as “In spite of its limitations, the Italian media landscape appears very alive and able to feed a public sphere focused on problems of general interest” (medialandscapes.org). Since there are limitations placed on the Italian media landscape, the theory that would most likely coincide with the Italian media landscape would be the social responsibility theory. This is so because the social responsibility theory “asserts that media should be free from most governmental constraints to provide the most reliable and impartial information to the public” (Pavlik, McIntosh, 410). The Italian media has its limitations but is still very useful. 

​Italy’s printing industry, like most countries’ industries have taken a fall since the beginning of the 21st century with the rise of technology. According to medialandscapes.org, this decline has been so bad that “Between 2007 and 2015, revenue dropped by more than 30%, from 41.4 to 30.6 billion euros.” (medialandscape.org). The decline of the print industry in Italy also a play a big role in advertisement revenues as “Between 2009 and 2015, the publishing industry lost about 50% of its total advertising revenues” (medialandscape.org). I would have to imagine that the Italian printing industry will try to make a move for the digital world. Along with Italy, the United States’ printing industry has declined as well. Declines in the United States print industry have been drastic to the point where “Between 2006 and 2016 total newspaper industry revenue declined from $49 billion to $18 billion.” (medialandscape.org). One of the main differences between the printing industries in Italy and the States and how powerful these industries are. In Italy, “Compared with other countries, local newspapers have a minor circulation and play a limited role in agenda setting.” (medialandscape.org). In the United states, newspapers like The Washington Post hold a great deal of power when it comes to agenda setting and news circulation.

​Contrary to the printing industry of Italy, the radio industry has experienced a good deal of success. In Italy, radio has “increased their global revenues by 0.8%, reaching a total amount of €8.5 million” (medialandscape.org). I think it is hard to imagine a time where the radio industry would ever fall regardless of the country because of the use of radios while people drive. In my own opinion, the only way the radio industry would fall would be if the motor vehicle industry fell and obviously that is hard to imagine. The Italian radio industry also includes private stations. Contrary to those private stations, the United States have more of a national public radio. This national public radio draws in about ”14-15 million listeners daily” (medialandscape.org). Another big part of the United States radio industry is the presence of podcasts, unlike the Italian radio industry. 

​The similarities between the United States and Italy continue with their internet freedom. According to freedomhouse.org, Italy’s internet freedom score is a 75 which is considered “free”, and the United State’s internet freedom score is a 77 which is also considered “free” (freedomhouse.org).It is obviously always good for multiple countries to have internet freedom scores.

​Italian cinema is based around “Italian neorealism”. Italian neorealism is based around stories set amongst the poor and the working class, filmed on location, frequently using non-professional actors (Wikipedia). This is very different from American cinema. American cinema can stretch from superhero movies like The Avengers to a drama like Uncut Gems. If I am being honest, I do not think I have ever seen a film that would closely associated to Italian neorealism, as it seems more European than American.
            Since these two countries have similar systems, the pros and cons of their systems coincide with each other. Each of these systems are pretty laxed on their restrictions and as we saw with their internet freedom scores, citizens in each country can essentially do whatever they want on the internet. It is hard to identify any cons for these systems because there are little to no responsibilities, but these limited responsibilities could lead to reckless activities. Another pro is the television popularity. Using a television is easy. All one has to do flip to a news channel, and they are set for receiving news as opposed to using the internet when one has a to do a bit of navigating. 

Sources
- https://medialandscapes.org/
- https://freedomhouse.org/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/
- https://www.thelocal.it/
- https://www.focus-economics.com/
- https://www.bbc.com

Link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-modernizing-immigration-system-stronger-america/ 
The speech I will be analyzing is a speech from the President of the united states, Donald Trump. His speech was made on the night of May 16, 2019 from the rose garden at the White House. In his speech, President Trump is laying out his plan for the new a new immigration system. 
President Trump’s speech lacks an attention getter. It is more of just an introduction to his topic rather than an attention getter. There is plenty of emotional appeal included in his speech. One example of this appeal would be when Trump states that “Our proposal builds upon our nation’s rich history of immigration, while strengthening the bonds of citizenship that bind us together as a national family.”. Trump shows how relevant this issue is by providing even more statistics that can also be used for emotional appeal. The statistics that Trump includes are “Currently, 66 percent of legal immigrants come here on the basis of random chance.”. The framing of Trump’s speech is overall positive because he is talking about an immigration system that allows people of all backgrounds to connect in the United States. Overall, I think his speech is effective because of the positive vibe it gives off because of the intended goal of the plan and based on how the plan works.

​After Trump made his speech laying out the blueprint for his new immigration system, many news outlets reported on the speech and there were many different frameworks of reporting on the speech given by President Trump. The framework of news reports on certain subjects is the angle or perspective from which a news story about a certain subject is told. Obviously with the speech being analyzed being a speech from President Trump, there be right side and left side reporting on the speech. The first example of a news outlet reporting on this speech would come from CNN. The link to this article is https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/16/politics/donald-trump-immigration-plan-announcement/index.html. Off the bat, one can clearly tell that this the framework of this article is more left sided based on the title of the article, which is “Trump unveils new (likely doomed) immigration plan”. (Vasquez) The article is written by Maegan Vasquez, and Vasquez goes on to state that democrats deem this proposal to be “drastic and inhumane.” (Vasquez). CNN is notoriously known for being a more democratic news outlet so it is not surprising that Vasquez would go that far when talking about Trump’s new plan. The word choice that Vasquez applies is also very telling of the framework she is creating. Vasquez says, “Trump boasted his measure was not drafted by politicians” (Vasquez). The word that really sticks out there is “boasted” as she is trying to get the idea across that Trump is bragging, which is something that arrogant people do. Vasquez also adds to her left sided negative framework when she states that “Just before the White House unveiled its immigration proposal, the mood on Capitol Hill was largely one of shrugs.” (Vasquez). Clearly, Vasquez is trying to find every way possible to place a negative perception on the unveiling of the new plan. The overall main point that Vasquez is making in this article is that this plan is not going to work clearly from the title and Vasquez also goes on to say her article that “The proposal, which many lawmakers are quick to describe as well-intentioned, isn't expected to provide the immigration breakthrough that has eluded lawmakers for the entirety of Trump's presidency” (Vasquez). 

​The next report/article we will be looking at in response to President Trump’s new immigration system will come from FOX news and the link to the article is: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/president-trump-unveils-sweeping-plan-to-transform-americas-immigration-system. At first read I notice that this report is more of a run down of what the plan is and what it is suppose to and what President Trump hopes it will achieve, contrary to the report released by CNN. With this report being released on FOX news, it is safe to assume that this article’s framework will be more right side and have a positive perception on Trump’s plan. To exploit this framework, writer Adam Shaw states “The plan does not deal with those already in the country illegally, including those who came to the country as children and were protected under an Obama-era executive order.” (Shaw). The two words that stick out from this quote from the article are “Illegally” and “Obama-era”. These words convey the idea these immigrants who came illegally came into the country came in while Obama was president, not Trump which also conveys the idea that Trump is a better president than Obama. The main point of this article is to explain that Trump’s new immigration system is more about letting immigrants who are more likely to be more productive in the work industry rather than just any immigrant. Shaw makes the main point very clear when he says “The proposal would judge immigrants with a points-based system that would favor high-skilled workers -- accounting for age, English proficiency, education and whether the applicant has a well-paying job offer.” (Shaw). Shaw wants the reader to know that this new system is about boosting morale. 

The final news report we will be looking at will be an article from the New York Times. The link for the article is: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/us/politics/trump-immigration-plan.html. Annie Karni, the writer of the article makes it very clear from the start of her article  about where she is going with the framework and main point of her article when Karni says, “But within minutes of taking the podium on Thursday, Mr. Trump struck a more familiar tone, bashing Democrats as advocates of “open borders, lower wages and, frankly, lawless chaos”” (Karni). One can clearly can tell that Karni is structuring a left sided and negative framework. Similarly, to the CNN article, Karni talks about the way he spoke. Karni states “his speech — a relatively low-energy address” (Karni). These left sided writers seem to nit pick at anything they can pick up from Trump’s speeches aside from the things he’s actually saying. The main point overall of Karni’s article was to criticize Trump’s performance as speaker, if you will.
            One of the main differences between speech/response and the coverage is that with the speech the media is just letting the speech playout, no analysis yet until the coverage. I do not think a frame can ever be accurate of a speaker’s message because of the bias of the person making a frame. People biased against the speaker obviously will have a negative response towards the speech but people who are more bias towards the speaker will always agree but will not exactly represent the message. They would probably fabricate some stuff to make the speaker’s message even better but less accurate. Liberal, conservative, and foreign news networks cover political speeches and its messages in different ways depending on who the speaker is and what they are saying, again, it is more about the bias. I think bias in the media is the most important factor when it comes to thinking about how a news network will cover a political happening whether it be a speech or an event. This means that the audience is most likely to want to receive their news from the news outlet that skews more bias towards the specific audience member’s political views.


References
-https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-modernizing-immigration-system-stronger-america/
- https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/16/us/politics/trump-immigration-plan.html
-https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/16/politics/donald-trump-immigration-plan-announcement/index.html
​-https://www.foxnews.com/politics/president-trump-unveils-sweeping-plan-to-transform-americas-immigration-system

What can be considered a staple to any newspaper would be political cartoons. Political cartoons are cartoons that make light of political news, topics, and events that are going on at that time. To give a better idea of what political cartoons are all about, political cartoons can be thought of public relations. The Princeton review refers to public relations as a job to “generate positive publicity for their client and enhance their reputation … They keep the public informed about the activity of government agencies, explain policy, and manage political campaigns.” (Forbes article). This is essentially the same purpose and goal of a political cartoon however, a difference between the two is that through the creation of a political cartoon, they can be created to generate negative publicity and degrade the reputation of a political figure.

​This political cartoon was chosen because of how relevant the cartoon is with the current events happening in the United States. This political cartoon has is based around the topic of coronavirus. The cartoonist’s opinion on the subject is obviously that the cartoonist does not believe that Trump is not handling the coronavirus pandemic well. In the cartoon, President Donald Trump is humorously drawn in the way a caricature would be drawn. As one can see in the cartoon, President Trump is saying in the cartoon that he has everything under control with an asterisk at the end of that statement. However, the asterisk is drawn to be a germ particle to represent the coronavirus. At the bottom of the cartoon is a sort of flip note to show what the asterisk means, and it simply says “LOL!”. The asterisk in the cartoon in a sense to laugh at the idea that President Trump has the ability to keep everything under control during the coronavirus pandemic. Ever since the pandemic has started, President Trump has been heavily criticized for the way he has handled the pandemic. A USA Today article displayed the results of poll on how they think Trump has handled the pandemic. According to the poll that was released this past Wednesday, 52% of Americans are disapproving of the job that Trump is doing as compared to the 48% that was tallied from early March (USA Today article). This cartoon is relying on the emotional appeal and ethical appeal because it is easily to speak ill of President Trump because of the kind of person he is but also, President Trump can probably do a better job handling this pandemic because early on he did refer to coronavirus as just another flu. What also sticks out in this political cartoon is the facial expressions of the medical experts standing behind Trump. All of them are showing no emotion alluding to the fact that they scared and that things are not under control contrary to President Trump’s belief that everything is under control.

Source: Florida Courier

​Here is another political cartoon in relation to President Trump. Drawn is what can be considered a rally for supporting Trump as Trump in the political cartoon is saying he draws the largest crowds. The humor can be found in the background of the cartoon to see the people in the crowd. The people are holding up signs that would be considered “anti-trump”. The signs say things such as “Death to America” and a sign with his last name with a red line going through it. What completes this cartoon is Trump’s facial expression which is smiling as he says that he draws the biggest crowds. Yes, he has drawn a big crowd but it’s a crowd that does not like him alluding to the fact that Trump is unaware that large groups of people do not like him at all. This political cartoon came out on January 9th 2020. The cartoonist clearly does not have a high opinion of Trump. In my own opinion, this kind of cartoon would be fitting for at any time of Trump’s tenure as president because from the start, people who did not vote for him and even for people who did vote for him do not like him. The coloring of this cartoon is quite telling. With Trump being the only one colored and the rest of the people in the crowd being in back and white, one can conclude that in the cartoon, Trump is the only one who thinks highly of himself while everyone is not colored all have the same opinion and dismay towards Trump. The emotional peal is very apparent in this cartoon with the signs saying things like death to America and “Trump” with a line through it is just raw emotion. There’s no logistical reasoning behind the hatred.

​The purpose of political cartoons is to humorously bring to light issues happening in the political world. These issues can be more serious than others. Political cartoons serve as a different way of looking at politics. Again, political cartoons tend to be rather humorous. They serve as a more light and funny way of looking at the political world rather than the seemingly always negative points of view of politics.

References 
- https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/04/08/coronavirus-polling-shows-majorities-disapproving-trumps-handling/2967994001/
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwynne/2016/01/21/five-things-everyone-should-know-about-public-relations/#45ba15bc2a2c
- http://flcourier.com/trump-gets-the-biggest-crowds/
- ​https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/bagley/2020/03/19/bagley-cartoon-trump/

image from weebly image bank

​ESPN, or the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network, was founded in 1979 by Bill Rasmussen, his son Scott Rasmussen, and Ed Eagan. ESPN is an American cable television network that broadcasts sports-related shows and sporting events. Social media is very important to ESPN because in January, it was announced that ESPN would be putting 500 live shows on social media. So social media is very important to their business because social media is an outlet for them to share their programming, sporting events, and shows along with television and radio.
            According to Troy Dreier of sportsvideo.org, for ESPN’s online strategy, “’more is more.’ Reaching more people on more social platforms grows the base overall. Appealing to new viewers creates lifelong fans. Every platform needs its own tailored approach, but a success on one helps build the overall ESPN brand.”. Since their strategy is more the merrier, ESPN uses all social media platforms including Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, and among others. According to unmetric.com, ESPN owns 68 social media profiles. They have 37 Facebook pages, 20 Twitter handles, eight Instagram accounts, two Youtube channels, and one LinkedIn account (unmetri.com), and of course, they also have ESPN+. ESPN has even developed their own social platform called “ESPN+”. They’ve selected these social media platforms and their own platform so “ [they] can have a complementary sports service in the over-the-top environment, thinking about how we’re presenting our programming and our content and our storytelling across platforms to reach and engage new audiences.”, per Connor Schell, who works with content at ESPN. As Connor Schell said in his statement, to engage with their audience, ESPN engages with their audience by sharing their content and their story telling across different platforms.  The audience engages with ESPN’s content by subscribing to ESPN+ for $4.99 a month. The audience also engages with ESPN’s content by watching the content that ESPN puts out and share their reactions on various social media platforms. This is known as “live-tweeting”, live tweeting is when someone is tweeting their reactions to something their watching that’s happening live. I have live tweeted before in the past and it’s a great way to give your thoughts on an event that’s happening live and have discussions with others who are also witnessing the live event. The audience makes effective “produsers” of more content and information because it gets people talking about the event and interacting with others and often times, the event will be on the trending page on Twitter.
            Considering ESPN’s business goals is to “increase brand awareness” according to Katie Richman, the director of social media strategy for ESPN, ESPN does use all social media tools effectively. According to Katie Richman, their approach to social media is “Our approach is to look at our demographics; who are we talking to? For example, with espnW we’re talking to women, and there is an active female audience on Pinterest.” (Katie Richman). ESPN does use all social media tools effectively because they scope out the demographic of each tool or platform and fit the needs of the demographic they scope out. This scoping out of demographics also shows that ESPN is leveraging its social media for the best effect/impression because they’re specifically scoping out the demographic people who it would effect the most. They’re trying to zero in on one group of people so their content is guaranteed to have a positive impact and help in spreading awareness of their brand. While there are pros to ESPN’s social media use, there are also some cons to their social media use. One pro of their social media use would be that they allow people to watch sports anywhere they want whether it be on their phone of their computer. Another pro would be that they use social media to break sporting news that people can conveniently check their phones for any breaking sports news. The pros for ESPN’s social media use is based around convenience. One con for ESPN’s social media use is that some information that ESPN shares is unnecessary. According to Michael Rudd of sportsnetworker.com, this unnecessary sharing of news forces “anchors and writers to try to create excitement to you when it’s not worth batting an eye.” (sportsnetworker.com). The social media platform that seems to be the most popular for ESPN is Facebook because ESPN has the most accounts on Facebook than any other social media site. If it’s working on that site, then they should exploit it. ESPN is effective at maintaining their social media accounts up to date. On this specific day, March Madness, the MLB, MLS, and NHL season has been suspended because of the coronavirus outbreak. Now it was not ESPN who specifically reported this it was but it was an ESPN writer, Adrian Wojnarowski, who was the first to break that the NBA was suspending their season due to coronavirus. Wojnarowski tweeted this at 9:31 pm on 3/11/20.
            Social media allows people to interact with others over the internet. Social media has many different uses though. News can be broken through social media, businesses can use social media to spread the awareness of their company by putting advertisements for their brand on several different social media platforms. As we learned with ESPN, you could also watch sports on social media. Social media’s main impact in my own opinion is that it has allowed us to communicate in ways that weren’t possible, social media has made communication easier and the ability to gain information better. If I were to make any recommendations to ESPN it would be to personalize interactions with their audience members. Improving online interactions leads to better engagement, more satisfied customers, and higher brand loyalty which increases sales. Another recommendation I would make for ESPN would be for them to level out the type of content they send out. ESPN way more content related to basketball and football than they do baseball and hockey. If they can evenly distribute the content for each sports they will be able to get more fans of different sports involved. I may be a little bias because baseball is my favorite sport but I feel like for a company that broadcasts a show called “sports center”, they should release content for all sports. 

References
- https://digiday.com/media/espn-marketing-espn/
-https://khoros.com/blog/how-espn-stays-social#
-​khoros.com/blog/espn-rob-king-social-media-engagement

​The news story that has been extensively covered in the past three to six months will be the Houston Astros cheating scandal. Towards the end of the 2019 calendar year, an article on The Athletic was released breaking the news that the Houston Astros had been illegally using a video camera system to steal signs signaled from the catcher to the pitcher during the 2017 season and at times during the 2018 season. The scandal was confirmed by former Astros pitcher, Mike Fiers, who was a member of that 2017 Houston Astros team. The way the Astros conducting their cheating seems blatantly obvious at the surface but unfortunately, it was not proven to be true until recently. The Astros would pick up on the signs for each pitch that the catcher was using and when they were able to pick up on the sign for a breaking ball, they would bang a trashcan back in the hallway of their dugout to let the batter know what was coming. Unfortunately, this Houston Astros team went on to win the world series. It was later revealed that they even cheated during the postseason that year. Including in the world series. I am choosing this topic because baseball is my favorite sport. Writing about topics I care about makes doing the assignment enjoyable for me. In fact, just as I am typing this, I have a baseball game on in the background. I have been so passionate about baseball for so long and I like to think that that is because of my two late grandfathers who were both huge baseball fans. Baseball was the way I connected with my two grandfathers. Chances are that I am probably not as into baseball as I am now without those two. Another reason why I picked this topic is because I do not believe the punishment given to the Astros was enough so any way to keep this scandal relevant and talked about only tarnishes the Astros’ “2017 World Series Title” even more.
Scene Setter:

https://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/ballparks/minute-maid-park/

​This is a picture of Minute Maid Park, home of the Houston Astros. This is where the Astros conducted their cheating. The offensive statistics for the Astros that season at home vs. on the road are egregious. According to 12up.com, at Minute Maid Park in the postseason, Jose Altuve’s offensive stats were as follows “.472 BA/.513 OBP/1.028 SLG/1.541 OPS, 17 H, 6 HR & 12 RBI” (12up.com).  His stats on the road during the post season were “43 BA, .268 OBP, .229 SLG, .497 OPS, 5 H, 1 HR & 2 RBI” (12up.com). Completely obvious. What should be in this picture is an indicator of where the Astros had their cameras set up to steal signs. The framing of the photo is very effective because it captures the entire playing field.
​Medium Shot:

:https://nypost.com/2019/11/14/alcs-whistling-video-emerges-to-support-ridiculous-yankees-accusations/https://nypost.com/2019/11/14/alcs-whistling-video-emerges-to-support-ridiculous-yankees-accusations/
This is the Astros dugout just a few feet into the hallway leading to the dugout is where the Astros were watching the catcher’s signals and banging a trash can to let their batter know what the pitcher is about to pitch. What should be in this picture that is not is monitor and the trash can that they used to cheat since the cheating happened only a few steps away. The framing of this photo is quite effective because not only does it capture the scene of the crime, but it also captures the players who were receiving these signs that were given to them via the banging of the trashcan. I also think the framing of this picture is very effective because it not only captures the players but it also captures the fans who are not cognizant of the cheating that is being done by the Astros.

​The Portrait:

https://twitter.com/Jomboy_/status/1196203106347945987?s=20
​In my honest opinion, this will go down as the most iconic picture of the whole scandal. This picture is missing nothing, it captures the scandal perfectly. It is a little grainy, but it says it all. One can clearly see someone setting up the monitor that they used to steal signs and behind the person setting it up is the infamous trashcan that they would bang to let the batter know what pitch was coming. Also pictured is Jose Altuve who not only won the world series with the Astros but also won the American League MVP award that year. What really contributes to the meaning of this picture is the world series patch on the sleeve of Altuve’s jersey and hat to have that and the monitor and trashcan in the same pictures is such a disappointing realization that they were cheating in the world series.
Capturing Detail:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fthe7line.com%2Fblogs%2Fthe-7-line%2Fmets-fans-guide-to-2017-playoffs-houston-astros&psig=AOvVaw2po6_VfvdC6m1OYeimjck2&ust=1582954659042000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCMDNnuXD8-cCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAP
This picture provides a really good transition towards the end of the story because this picture doesn’t capture the Astros winning the world series but it still captures them experiencing the a part of the large amount of success that they experienced that season. In this picture, the Astros are celebrating their American League West division title. Again, I think the unaware fans being in the picture is very powerful for the telling of this story.

​Capturing Action:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dw.com%2Fen%2Fhouston-astros-win-their-first-ever-championship-in-baseballs-world-series%2Fa-41202157&psig=AOvVaw1eEMQNGiq-qTHS4ZmgZew5&ust=1582954777367000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCPjxv57E8-cCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD
The most unfortunate part of all of this is that this Astros team won the world series during the 2017 season in which they cheated. The framing of this picture is good. It captures a team who did not deserve to win the world series celebrating winning the world series. I think they’re facial expressions are a little telling. Yes, some of them are smiling but most of the players in this picture are not smiling. It is almost like they know they didn’t deserve this title.
 
I chose these specific pictures because I really think that these pictures followed the story in the perfect way. The pictures I chose also included a lot of detail which adds to the story and the overall visual presentation. If the arrangement was changed, the story would be presented at the time the actual scandal came out. I would change my “capturing action” and the “portrait” because the cheating scandal was leaked after they won the world series. If there was ever a perfect situation to talk about the ethical concerns in regard to picture selection, this would be it. In the required reading about the ethics of visual presentation, writer Austin Clines states “One of the ethical problems of reality television is the fact that it isn't nearly as "real" as it pretends to be.” (ethics article). In the capturing action picture, the Astros are celebrating their world series title and at the surface, it can be viewed as real but what they did was not ethical and their title should not be considered as real. This is a major issue with visual presentation. There may be visual detail but the context is not always there and people will not always be able to tell what is going on behind the scenes, which can lead to a faulty story being told. The future of visual presentation is exciting. Since technology is revolutionizing everything, it is really interesting to see how creative people get with visual presentation. According to 

https://blog.syncios.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/streaming-music-graphic.jpg

​​Did you know you could become a millionaire just by talking to a rhythm? Yes, all you have to do is become a professional musician! It is that easy. Like most industries, the music industry has evolved alongside the technology industry. The aspect of the music industry that has changed the most with the evolution of technology has been the business aspect of the music industry. Since around after the 1880s, the time around when music was first starting to be sold for royalties, music has been sold in many different fashions, such as “radio in the 1920s, movie sound tracks in the late 1920s, television in the 1950s, cassette tapes in the early 1960s, CDs in the early 1980s, DVDs in the mid 1990s, and MP3s in the late 1990s.” (American Popular Song: A Brief History). Today, there are many different sources where we can get our musical fix with the evolution of technology. The sources include paid subscriptions to music sites such as “Spotify”, “Pandora”, “Soundcloud”, and “Apple Music”. Artists will now sell their music to these sites and people will then purchase subscriptions to these sites and have access to the music that the specific site has to offer. There are other ways to access music now such as “iTunes” and the radio. I know everyone has to make their money, but I am not sure if I love the whole subscription idea when it comes to accessing music. This type of business in the music industry really beats down on the radio industry. Rather than jumping in the car and just turning on the radio, people now hookup their phones to their car with Spotify loaded up, and play the music of their choice rather than turning on the radio and listening to whatever the radio station they tuned into was playing. While I though the rise of these subscription-based platforms would take over the music industry, I was wrong. According to Randy Lane of radioink.com, “Radio is the #1 reach medium at 93% of the U.S. population weekly including 92% of Millennials.”. While it is good that the radio industry is holding up with the rise of these platforms, I do not think it will last long because it is very hard for something as old-fashioned as radio to keep up with something as high tech as the internet that can provide us with music streaming platforms.
            The first song from my playlist that I will address is “Break My Stride” by Matthew Wilder. The record labels of Matthew Wilder include Columbia Records and Epic Records. Both Columbia Records and Epic Records are owned by Sony Music Entertainment. This song costed me $1.29. Matthew Wilder gets 12%-20% of the sales made off of the song. So that would mean Matthew Wilder makes about 20 cents off each sale. Sony will receive 60 cents. Apple, the retailer will receive about 40 cents of each sale. I think distribution of money between each part of the transaction is fair because without Sony and Apple, it would be much more difficult for Matthew Wilder to sell his product.
            The next song I will address on my playlist is “Horse With No Name” by the band Seelenuft. The record label of Seelenuft is International Deejay Gigolo Records. International Deejay Gigolo Records is owned by DJ Hell. According to the Wikipedia page, International Deejay Gigolo Records is “Germany's most successful electronic music record label, specializing in electro, house and techno with 80's pop and disco influences.” (Wikipedia). Similar to my listening of “Break My Stride” by Matthew Wilder, I purchased the song through Apple so distribution of royalties to each member of the transaction will be the same. The band Seelenuft will get around 12%-20% of each sale of the song which is about 20 cents for each sale. International Deejay Gigolo Records will receive 60 cents, and Apple will receive about 40 cents.
             The final song I will address on my playlist is “Texarkana” by R.E.M. and this song has been my favorite song since I was a little kid. Growing up, my Mom would play R.E.M. songs for me and my brother like “Man On The Moon”, “It’s the End of the World As We Know It”, “The Great Beyond”, “Loosing My Religion”, “Stand”, and “Pop Song 83” while we sat in the back of our Mom’s white Ford expedition. Texarkana is not only a fantastic song but it reminds me of my childhood. Anytime I’m sad or going through a funk, that song always seems to lift my spirits. R.E.M. have quite a few record labels and they as followed: Warner Records, Capitol Records, I.R.S. Records, Warner Bros, Rhino Entertainment, Hib-Tone, Concord Music, New West Records, and Craft Recordings. I will be focusing on the Warner Records label. Warner Records label is a record label owned by Warner Bros. Just like the previous two songs, I bought Texarkana on iTunes. Now, considering that R.E.M. is a very popular and iconic band, they should receive more than 12% of the sale and upwards of 20% of the sale because according to Steve Knopper from Rolling Stone article, the percentage range of royalties that the artist/band will receive from each sale of the song. Knopper says that the more popular bands get a higher percentage so I’m assuming R.E.M. got the full 20%. This means R.E.M. would receive 24 cents. Warner Bros still receive around 60 cents and Apple will receive 40 cents still.
            

https://www.udiscovermusic.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/REM-1994-Monster-press-shot-02-CREDT-Jem-Cohen.jpg

Music, people talking to the flow of a rhythm and at the consistency of different kinds of beats while simultaneously rhyming the words that they’re speaking. Like most industries, the music industry has evolved alongside the technology industry. The aspect of the music industry that has changed the most with the evolution of technology has been the business aspect of the music industry. Since around after the 1880s, the time around when music was first starting to be sold for royalties, music has been sold in many different fashions, such as “radio in the 1920s, movie sound tracks in the late 1920s, television in the 1950s, cassette tapes in the early 1960s, CDs in the early 1980s, DVDs in the mid 1990s, and MP3s in the late 1990s.” (American Popular Song: A Brief History). Today, there are many different sources where we can get our musical fix with the evolution of technology. The sources include paid subscriptions to music sites such as “Spotify”, “Pandora”, “Soundcloud”, and “Apple Music”. Artists will now sell their music to these sites and people will then purchase subscriptions to these sites and have access to the music that the specific site has to offer. There are other ways to access music now such as “iTunes” and the radio. I know everyone has to make their money, but I am not sure if I love the whole subscription idea when it comes to accessing music. This type of business in the music industry really beats down on the radio industry. Rather than jumping in the car and just turning on the radio, people now hookup their phones to their car with Spotify loaded up, and play the music of their choice rather than turning on the radio and listening to whatever the radio station they tuned into was playing. While I though the rise of these subscription-based platforms would take over the music industry, I was wrong. According to Randy Lane of radioink.com, “Radio is the #1 reach medium at 93% of the U.S. population weekly including 92% of Millennials.”. While it is good that the radio industry is holding up with the rise of these platforms, I do not think it will last long because it is very hard for something as old-fashioned as radio to keep up with something as high tech as the internet that can provide us with music streaming platforms.
            The first song from my playlist that I will address is “Break My Stride” by Matthew Wilder. The record labels of Matthew Wilder include Columbia Records and Epic Records. Both Columbia Records and Epic Records are owned by Sony Music Entertainment. This song costed me $1.29. Matthew Wilder gets 12%-20% of the sales made off of the song. So that would mean Matthew Wilder makes about 20 cents off each sale. Sony will receive 60 cents. Apple, the retailer will receive about 40 cents of each sale. I think distribution of money between each part of the transaction is fair because without Sony and Apple, it would be much more difficult for Matthew Wilder to sell his product.
            The next song I will address on my playlist is “Horse With No Name” by the band Seelenuft. The record label of Seelenuft is International Deejay Gigolo Records. International Deejay Gigolo Records is owned by DJ Hell. According to the Wikipedia page, International Deejay Gigolo Records is “Germany's most successful electronic music record label, specializing in electro, house and techno with 80's pop and disco influences.” (Wikipedia). Similar to my listening of “Break My Stride” by Matthew Wilder, I purchased the song through Apple so distribution of royalties to each member of the transaction will be the same. The band Seelenuft will get around 12%-20% of each sale of the song which is about 20 cents for each sale. International Deejay Gigolo Records will receive 60 cents, and Apple will receive about 40 cents.
             The final song I will address on my playlist is “Texarkana” by R.E.M. and this song has been my favorite song since I was a little kid. Growing up, my Mom would play R.E.M. songs for me and my brother like “Man On The Moon”, “It’s the End of the World As We Know It”, “The Great Beyond”, “Loosing My Religion”, “Stand”, and “Pop Song 83” while we sat in the back of our Mom’s white Ford expedition. Texarkana is not only a fantastic song but it reminds me of my childhood. Anytime I’m sad or going through a funk, that song always seems to lift my spirits. R.E.M. have quite a few record labels and they as followed: Warner Records, Capitol Records, I.R.S. Records, Warner Bros, Rhino Entertainment, Hib-Tone, Concord Music, New West Records, and Craft Recordings. I will be focusing on the Warner Records label. Warner Records label is a record label owned by Warner Bros. Just like the previous two songs, I bought Texarkana on iTunes. Now, considering that R.E.M. is a very popular and iconic band, they should receive more than 12% of the sale and upwards of 20% of the sale because according to Steve Knopper from Rolling Stone article, the percentage range of royalties that the artist/band will receive from each sale of the song. Knopper says that the more popular bands get a higher percentage so I’m assuming R.E.M. got the full 20%. This means R.E.M. would receive 24 cents. Warner Bros still receive around 60 cents and Apple will receive 40 cents still.
            The evolution of digital media has drastically changed the way we listen to and experience music. I think this advancement in the technology surrounding music is amazing for the industry. Like I said, it creates new opportunities for the industry to distribute their product and ways for fans to listen to music. An example of this would be in the “Where the Music Business is Going 2020”, writer Ethan Millman states that “Billie Eilish, Post Malone, and Tenacious D all offered virtual reality shows through Oculus Venues in 2019, and more VR shows should be underway this year.” (Where the Music Business is Going 2020 article).  The only thing you use to be able to at concerts was just show up and just watch the concert. Now, people have the option to not even go to the concert and stay in the comfort of their own home and watch the concert through virtual reality. Virtual reality introduces a new way of experiencing concerts. Another way digital media is improving the music business would be through platforms such as Spotify. Before Spotify, people would only be able to purchase songs one at a time or one album at a time nut now with Spotify, someone can pay for a subscription and have access to almost any song. According to Ethan Millman, “Spotify says it receives 40,000 new songs a day; there’s no telling what that number will be by the end of 2020.” (Where the Music Business is Going 2020 article). One last way that digital media is bettering the music business industry would be going back to the whole concert aspect of the music business. Ethan Millman mentions an instance in 2012 where “Tupac’s hologram appearance during Snoop Dogg’s Coachella set” (Where the Music Business is Going 2020 article). I think this is the coolest impact that digital media has had on the music business. We all know that Tupac tragically died and there are a lot of people who love his music and never got to see him preform live. With thus holographic performance, the music companies can come this close to recreating a Tupac performance. I think its truly amazing that this new technological resource for performances can bring back iconic throwbacks such as Tupac. Seeing this kind of innovation in the music industry right now makes me so excited to see what it in store for the future.