Fully Realized Experiment Rationale

For my fully realized experiiment, I am going to be pursuing my third experiment, which focused on interviewing journalists about journalism in the ‘fake news’ era as well as female journalists about their careers. My rhetorical situation is pretty straightforward. As a university student writing interviewing journalists, my background will impact the way audience members perceive the credibility of my work. I am writing to member’s in my own community as well as anyone interested in journalism in modern society, especially when its credibility as a craft is so under attack right now. I want to emphasize the importance of journalism’s place in a democracy. Likewise, what’s happening in the world will affect everything to do with my piece because current events are what inspired me to pursue this project.     

This experiment has been the one in the back of my mind since the start of this class. Basically, I’ve been itching to work on something like this since I wrote my origin piece last semester, and so my belief in this has been the strongest by virtue of being the idea I’ve always been the most excited about. Likewise, I believe in this experiment over my first experiment (satirical BuzzFeed post about podcasts) because I think it’s more engaging in terms of the focus and more relevant to real issues. Additionally, I believe in this experiment over my second experiment (making my own podcast) because I would not have to pick up on as many technical skills, and therefore my final product will be more put-together.

While I am not a student journalist, journalism has always been something I have cared immensely about. Likewise, I recognize that journalists’ goal is to tell the story, not be the story. However, I also think that achieving credible insight into the world of journalism from the source — the reporter’s I’d interview — would emphasize the importance of quality reporting, especially in today’s world.

The genre I’ve chosen to use the deliver my message, feature/profile writing, is a strong one because it’s the subject of my project. Initially, I had been hoping to write several traditional features stories, but realize that with the time allotted for this project in addition to other work that wouldn’t be doable. So, I switched my sights to a general ask and answer format. However, I think this could possibly be even more impactful because the information is streamlined for readers, and it allows more room for the interviewees’ voice, which is what I want to prioritize.

Potential challenges reaching my audience is a lack of interest and political affiliation. There’s a perception that the media at large is liberal and therefore is biased against conservatives or Republican’s. This plays into issues with reaching my audience because I am focusing on the problems associated with reporting in the era of “fake news;” something often associated with the right side of the political spectrum. So really, the issue of political bias common to most things today will probably be my main issue.

I’m hoping with the style of this it would fit in with an online publication like VICE or Buzzfeed (when they try to be more serious). The tone I am aiming for these pieces are straightforward and hopefully adaptable to any online publication.

A Day in the Life

Amanda Hess is an internet culture critic, so she most likely conducts ‘research’ just by trolling through the internet, twitter, and other social media platforms. Internet culture is mostly influenced by the interaction of people across platforms and social media, and likewise, research would be incredibly accessible to her.

According to Hess’s bio on The New York Times website, before joining the NYT in 2016, she wrote for Slate, Washington City Paper, ESPN, Elle, and Pacific Standard. Now she’s published in The New York Times and The New York Times Magazine.

Since my writer is a staff writer for The New York Time (meaning she is employed by them), she has to write critiques about internet culture because that’s what she was hired to do. However, since she is also a critic, and therefore publishes her opinion, she most likely has more freedom than most staff writers to write about what she wants rather than have something assigned to her. The ‘people’ or ideas who stand in the way of an idea and publication would be her editors. Once an idea clears them, she probably has little standing in her way as long as the idea/article endures edits.

Likewise, I say that Hess probably has more freedom to publish what she wants because of the breadth of her topic. Internet culture is wide-sweeping and would allow a writer to touch on nearly anything they wanted as long as it existed in the realm of online, which arguably anything does nowadays.

Finally, Hess would get paid by The New York Times either by story or a salary.

An Introduction

Hi, my name is Kennady Wade. I’m a sophomore majoring in Political Science and  (once I finish my language requirement second semester junior year) International Studies with a sub-plan in International Security Norms & Cooperation. I’m from Saint Louis, Missouri but have also lived in Atlanta for one short year. However, even though I lived in the same city for my entire life, I have lived in nine different houses and gone to now (countaing college) seven different schools, which is always a fun fact of mine. I attribute that as one of the reasons I started writing. I think I got tired of always meeting new people so I put a lot of effort into writing instead of talking.

The reason I chose to become a Minor in Writing is pretty straightforward in the sense that I missed writing and wanted an opportunity to produce content outside the normal constraints of academic analytical essays. Likewise, I wanted to be able to improve my writing in areas where it’s the weakest — like academic writing, coming full circle. Likewise, whatever career I pursue I know I need to be a strong writer, and a program that challenges me to improve my writing is what I wanted.

The pieve I’ll be using for my origin piece this termed is titled “Masters of Journalism: ​Caliphate​ and the Push to Uncover ISIS.” It discusses the techniques used by The New York Times podcast, Caliphate to create a narrative. This seemed like a good starting point for my writing experimentation because it offers numerous potential topics to work from. For example, I talk about the importance of journalism, podcasts as a new medium to convey stories, international terrorist groups, refugee crises, etc. Basically I can take it wherever I want. Honestly, I think it’s one of the worst pieces I’ve written while at college, but the topic in general is something I’m personally obsessed with.  

I’m not sure if this is the direction I take, but this past year I have become infatuated with podcasts, specifically investigative ones that take time to unravel a story. As a way to convey information, it’s convenient which is why I think they have gotten so popular in a society where we always try to multitask. However, the audio feature of having the story in your ears offers the narrative the opportunity to immerse you in a way that only music could before. It pulls you in with the sounds of the environment and the voices of the interviewees. That was my topic that I focused on in my origin piece, and a string I think I’d like to unravel.