A starting point
The hunt began in January 2008. Madeline V. Verochio would search the JobX website—hosted by the Office of Student Financial Aid and the Office of Career Services—and the classified section of the Daily Evergreen, looking for employment.
She spent countless hours filling out applications and job inquiries, sending resumes and writing cover letters explaining her merits. Unfortunately, her efforts went mostly unnoticed.
Verochio would sign on to her white HP laptop computer and check her e-mail at various times through out the day. “It got to be a little obsessive at times,” admits Verochio. Rejection letters would sometimes litter her inbox.
Verochio was beginning to feel restless and uncertain.
“I was really struggling to cover the rest of my living expenses and I needed a job,” said Verochio. “It eventually came to the point when I just gave up. I wasn’t finding anything. No one seemed interested. I got really discouraged.”
Eventually, she gave up the ghost. Instead, she focused on her academics making sure that she was on track for graduation in May 2009. In doing so, she almost entirely forgot about finding a job.
Sarah Jolly, an acquaintance of Verochio, was employed with University Relations as a clerical assistant. Jolly was graduating in May 2008 which would in turn leave the position with University Relations available for the upcoming academic year. “Sarah recommended me for the position,” said Verochio.
Soon after Jolly’s recommendation, Verochio met with Barb Olson for an interview.
The reality
Many Americans are struggling to find employment. Due to a worsening economy, unemployment rates both nationally and regionally have drastically increased.
According to a recent report by the state Employment Security Department, Washington State’s unemployment rate has increased to 8.4% in February.
This rate has increased by .6% since January. Furthermore, unemployment in the state of Washington has increased by 3.7% since the same time last year.
Washington State’s unemployment rates are even higher than the national average of 8.1%.
Whitman County’s unemployment rate is up .6% from last year to 5%. The county currently boasts the lowest unemployment rate in the state despite Washington State University’s—a large employer in the area—hiring freeze and budget cuts.
In August 2008 Gov. Christine Gregoire ordered all Washington state colleges and universities to implement a hiring freeze while simultaneously reducing travel and equipment expenses. As a result, Washington State University has limited its staff recruitment efforts to allow only for the replacement of positions deemed essential to university operations.
Matthew A. Skinner, associate budget director said, “For hiring freeze purposes, each Dean or Director works with the Provost, Chancellor or Vice President of the department to determine if a position is essential.” Ultimately, there is no standard as to how ‘essential’ is defined.
The hiring freeze has resulted in fewer positions being filled at Washington State University. 215 fewer people were hired during May and December 2008 as compared to the same period in 2007, said Skinner. This means that there were nearly 50 percent fewer positions filled.
Joan S. King, director of budget and planning said, “The initial hiring freeze has proven to have been a prudent step. By slowing the rate of hiring last April, it has resulted in less people being laid off due to budget cuts.”
Washington State University’s recent budget cuts are aimed at reducing communication expenditures, increases in salaries and hiring new faculty and staff.
A happy ending
Shortly after the interviewing process was completed, Verochio was offered the position with University Relations. Verochio said, “Sometimes that’s all it takes. Knowing the right person and making the right connections.”
In a recent USA Today article, despite the economic recession, colleges and universities have created more than 220,000 new jobs since the recession began in December 2007. This sector of the national economy is one of the few industries still creating and filling positions.
Verochio’s hiring mirrors this national trend. However, her long and grueling search to find a job echoes a struggle that plagues many Americans today.
“I don’t know what I’m going to do after I graduate in May and leave University Relations,” said Verochio. “To be honest, I’m really scared. With the way the economy is going right now, things aren’t looking good for a lot of us.”
----
References:
Madeline V. Verochio – Clerical Assistant with University Relations
Joan S. King – Executive Director of Budget and Planning
(509) 335-9681
Matthew A. Skinner – Associate Director of Budget
(509) 335-1836
Cauchon, Dennis. “Certain areas of economy swelling with jobs”. USA Today.
“Current Employment Situation”. Workforce Explorer: Washington. Washington State Employment Security Department.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Profile Story - Topic 2?
Profiling a person struggling to find a job at Washington State University. What was gone through in finding a job -- goes over a year's journey. From applying for jobs to rejection to finally finding a job at WSU. This profile will be used as a tool to demonstrate the unemployment rates (United States > Washington > Pullman), the hiring freeze and the hiring of only those that are deemed "essential". What does this mean?
Interviews
1. Madeline V. Verochio
2. Joan King
3. Matt Skinner
Interviews
1. Madeline V. Verochio
2. Joan King
3. Matt Skinner
Beat Articles
"Wash. unemployment rate jumps to 8.4 percent in February; higher than national rate"
By Rachel La Corte
The Seattle Times - Associated Press
"Certain areas of economy swelling with jobs"
By Dennis Cauchon
USA Today
"Wal-Mart starting to take shape"
By Taras Zhulev
The Daily Evergreen
By Rachel La Corte
The Seattle Times - Associated Press
"Certain areas of economy swelling with jobs"
By Dennis Cauchon
USA Today
"Wal-Mart starting to take shape"
By Taras Zhulev
The Daily Evergreen
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Profile Story - A Topic?
Profile someone on the Committee (Ryan?) for finding a Dean for the School of Communication. Then tie this in to a greater trend at WSU concerning budget cuts and filling empty positions.
Beat Articles
"County boasts low unemployment rate"
By Taras Zhulev
The Daily Evergreen
"When economy bottoms out, how will we know?"
By Alan Zibel, Christopher Leonard and Tim Paradis
Seattle P.I.
"World Bank says global economy will shrink in 2009"
By Samantha Bomkamp
The Seattle Times
By Taras Zhulev
The Daily Evergreen
"When economy bottoms out, how will we know?"
By Alan Zibel, Christopher Leonard and Tim Paradis
Seattle P.I.
"World Bank says global economy will shrink in 2009"
By Samantha Bomkamp
The Seattle Times
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
The U.S. military-media relationship has shifted post-Vietnam due to embedding
The media’s coverage of U.S. military involvement overseas has shifted from extremely negative to somewhat positive post-Vietnam. Embedding has in part, influenced this shift.
The First Amendment allows the press to freely criticize the American government. Citizens of the United States often take for granted that the press is independent of the government. Arnold S. Wolfe argues, “Information from diverse and antagonistic sources is crucial for a democracy.” As a result, the military and the media are often seen as competing (and sometimes hostile) institutions because of their contrasting objectives.
The media emerged as critics of U.S. foreign policy in the 1960s, especially in regards to U.S. involvement in Vietnam and Korea. The Vietnam War was the first war where television played an important role. Journalists reported the Vietnam War in terms that often contradicted the official declarations of the current administration. Reporters had the power to generate public opposition to the war. According to Jonathan Merman, journalists created opposition by writing “stories that encouraged Americans to question the wisdom and credibility of the federal government.”
Don Kirk, a foreign correspondent in Vietnam and Korea during the wars, said “It was almost fashionable to be critical of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. A majority of correspondence was critical.” This was partly due to the fervent anti-war passions that characterize the Vietnam era.
In order to combat the media’s negative coverage of U.S. military efforts, the government would limit wartime reporting through sequesters, deception, escorts, “televised spectacles”, news blackout, limited embedding or gag orders. These efforts were coupled with government’s ability to censor information based on issues of operational security or the success of the military mission.
In the wake of defeat in Vietnam, military officials gathered searched for the reasons for their defeat. Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Douglas J. Goebel writes, “Many [military officials] concluded that the media’s coverage of the war was a factor in the outcome of the war.”
After Vietnam, the government has tried to curb negative coverage of U.S. military efforts. The Department of Defense (DoD) concluded that in order to win the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the media must report positively on the war efforts. Consequently, the military has encouraged the embedding of journalists. As a result, the military is able to influence the kinds of stories published. Wartime coverage has become more positive post-Vietnam. Don Kirk said, “I don’t sense the same level of criticism.”
The shift in wartime coverage may be somewhat attributed to the Bush administration’s decision to implement the “Embedded Reporter Program” in May of 2003. The program allowed journalists to cover real-time, frontline combat by being placed within individual military units. The program was implemented based on the premise that press reports of success and progress strengthen public support for foreign policy. The Bush administration and the DoD believed that embedded journalists would be more sympathetic (and therefore more likely) to publish positive stories about the military, the soldiers and their efforts.
“We would publish press releases to generate publicity and the media would sometimes pick them up," LTC Whiteside said. "We would take them around and show them places so they could find their story. Sometimes, we would run operations just for the media and show them all the good we’re doing.” Ultimately, the media has become the mechanism in which the military communicates to the public its objectives and successes.
W. Lance Bennett said, “Journalists and political officials [are] engaged in a process of symbiosis or mutual dependence, in which each side used the other to promote particular organizational (press or government) goals.”
Andrew P. Cortell writes, “The embed program used in the 2003 invasion of Iraq represents a shift in U.S. military-media relations.” Instead of the military unilaterally determining and limiting the media’s role in wartime coverage (as was the case in Vietnam), they’re instead working with the media which has resulted in cooperation.
Embedded journalists have thus provided positive portrayals of the troops in their individual units and have found it difficult to offer an overarching picture of the military campaign. “The DoD judged its media strategy to be a success with respect to operational security, objective reporting, and public support,” wrote Cortell.
Though the relationship between the U.S. military and the media has improved considerably since the Vietnam-era, it is still not perfect. Cortell argues, “New technologies have… complicated the relationship between the military and the media.”
The military’s capacity to limit access of the media may be effective only for those members of the media who are willing to be restrained. James Reston believed that “it was no longer possible for a free country to fight even a limited war in a world of modern communication, with reporters and television cameras on the battlefield.”
Information regarding the military’s efforts is becoming increasingly available because of the journalist’s access to new technologies. Journalists are now able to file their stories directly from the field. Technological advances could result in breaches of military secrets to compromises in U.S. military forces’ image with domestic and foreign audiences. “The new technologies can pose problems for operational security and could compromise the casualty notification system but there’s an implicit trust between the soldiers and the reporters,” said Whiteside.
Though, there are military officials that are still concerned with the media’s coverage of war. The military is afraid that reporters only want ‘bang-bang’ stories of battle which is contradictory to the military’s belief that war coverage should focus on political, economic and diplomatic progress. “The media wants the scandal. Not the good that we’re doing,” said Whiteside. “The media tends to be more negative; it’s the nature of journalism or maybe it’s just the nature of humans.”
According to a McCormick Tribune Foundation conference series that analyzed the current military-media relationship, “The military feel aggrieved that their successes are not given more coverage by the media.”
Though, many journalists believe that it is their job to tell the truth and let the public decide on the success or failure of the war. During the conference series, many journalists believed that it was the “role of the media to be watchdogs and not take sides.”
References:
Cortell, Andrew P., Robert M Eisinger and Scott L. Althaus. “Why Embed?: Explaining the Bush Administration’s Decision to Embed Reporters in the 2003 Invasion of Iraq”. American Behavioral Scientist. 2009: vol. 52: p. 657-677.
Goebel, Douglas J., LTC USAF. “Military-Media Relations: The future media environment and its influence on military operations”. Air War College, Air University. April 1995..
Mermin, Jonathan. Debating war and peace: Media coverage of U.S. intervention in post-Vietnam era. 1999. New Jersey: Princeton Review.
“The Military-Media Relationship 2005 – How the armed forces, journalists and the public view coverage of military conflict”. McCormick Tribune Conference Series: Executive Summary. McCormick Tribune Foundation.
Wolfe, Arnold S., Jeromy Swanson and Stacy Wrona. “What the American people deserve from American journalism during wartime: A First Amendment view abetted by semiotic analysis”. Journalism Studies. 2008: vol. 9, no. 1. 38-56.
The First Amendment allows the press to freely criticize the American government. Citizens of the United States often take for granted that the press is independent of the government. Arnold S. Wolfe argues, “Information from diverse and antagonistic sources is crucial for a democracy.” As a result, the military and the media are often seen as competing (and sometimes hostile) institutions because of their contrasting objectives.
The media emerged as critics of U.S. foreign policy in the 1960s, especially in regards to U.S. involvement in Vietnam and Korea. The Vietnam War was the first war where television played an important role. Journalists reported the Vietnam War in terms that often contradicted the official declarations of the current administration. Reporters had the power to generate public opposition to the war. According to Jonathan Merman, journalists created opposition by writing “stories that encouraged Americans to question the wisdom and credibility of the federal government.”
Don Kirk, a foreign correspondent in Vietnam and Korea during the wars, said “It was almost fashionable to be critical of U.S. involvement in Vietnam. A majority of correspondence was critical.” This was partly due to the fervent anti-war passions that characterize the Vietnam era.
In order to combat the media’s negative coverage of U.S. military efforts, the government would limit wartime reporting through sequesters, deception, escorts, “televised spectacles”, news blackout, limited embedding or gag orders. These efforts were coupled with government’s ability to censor information based on issues of operational security or the success of the military mission.
In the wake of defeat in Vietnam, military officials gathered searched for the reasons for their defeat. Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Douglas J. Goebel writes, “Many [military officials] concluded that the media’s coverage of the war was a factor in the outcome of the war.”
After Vietnam, the government has tried to curb negative coverage of U.S. military efforts. The Department of Defense (DoD) concluded that in order to win the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the media must report positively on the war efforts. Consequently, the military has encouraged the embedding of journalists. As a result, the military is able to influence the kinds of stories published. Wartime coverage has become more positive post-Vietnam. Don Kirk said, “I don’t sense the same level of criticism.”
The shift in wartime coverage may be somewhat attributed to the Bush administration’s decision to implement the “Embedded Reporter Program” in May of 2003. The program allowed journalists to cover real-time, frontline combat by being placed within individual military units. The program was implemented based on the premise that press reports of success and progress strengthen public support for foreign policy. The Bush administration and the DoD believed that embedded journalists would be more sympathetic (and therefore more likely) to publish positive stories about the military, the soldiers and their efforts.
“We would publish press releases to generate publicity and the media would sometimes pick them up," LTC Whiteside said. "We would take them around and show them places so they could find their story. Sometimes, we would run operations just for the media and show them all the good we’re doing.” Ultimately, the media has become the mechanism in which the military communicates to the public its objectives and successes.
W. Lance Bennett said, “Journalists and political officials [are] engaged in a process of symbiosis or mutual dependence, in which each side used the other to promote particular organizational (press or government) goals.”
Andrew P. Cortell writes, “The embed program used in the 2003 invasion of Iraq represents a shift in U.S. military-media relations.” Instead of the military unilaterally determining and limiting the media’s role in wartime coverage (as was the case in Vietnam), they’re instead working with the media which has resulted in cooperation.
Embedded journalists have thus provided positive portrayals of the troops in their individual units and have found it difficult to offer an overarching picture of the military campaign. “The DoD judged its media strategy to be a success with respect to operational security, objective reporting, and public support,” wrote Cortell.
Though the relationship between the U.S. military and the media has improved considerably since the Vietnam-era, it is still not perfect. Cortell argues, “New technologies have… complicated the relationship between the military and the media.”
The military’s capacity to limit access of the media may be effective only for those members of the media who are willing to be restrained. James Reston believed that “it was no longer possible for a free country to fight even a limited war in a world of modern communication, with reporters and television cameras on the battlefield.”
Information regarding the military’s efforts is becoming increasingly available because of the journalist’s access to new technologies. Journalists are now able to file their stories directly from the field. Technological advances could result in breaches of military secrets to compromises in U.S. military forces’ image with domestic and foreign audiences. “The new technologies can pose problems for operational security and could compromise the casualty notification system but there’s an implicit trust between the soldiers and the reporters,” said Whiteside.
Though, there are military officials that are still concerned with the media’s coverage of war. The military is afraid that reporters only want ‘bang-bang’ stories of battle which is contradictory to the military’s belief that war coverage should focus on political, economic and diplomatic progress. “The media wants the scandal. Not the good that we’re doing,” said Whiteside. “The media tends to be more negative; it’s the nature of journalism or maybe it’s just the nature of humans.”
According to a McCormick Tribune Foundation conference series that analyzed the current military-media relationship, “The military feel aggrieved that their successes are not given more coverage by the media.”
Though, many journalists believe that it is their job to tell the truth and let the public decide on the success or failure of the war. During the conference series, many journalists believed that it was the “role of the media to be watchdogs and not take sides.”
References:
Cortell, Andrew P., Robert M Eisinger and Scott L. Althaus. “Why Embed?: Explaining the Bush Administration’s Decision to Embed Reporters in the 2003 Invasion of Iraq”. American Behavioral Scientist. 2009: vol. 52: p. 657-677.
Goebel, Douglas J., LTC USAF. “Military-Media Relations: The future media environment and its influence on military operations”. Air War College, Air University. April 1995.
Mermin, Jonathan. Debating war and peace: Media coverage of U.S. intervention in post-Vietnam era. 1999. New Jersey: Princeton Review.
“The Military-Media Relationship 2005 – How the armed forces, journalists and the public view coverage of military conflict”. McCormick Tribune Conference Series: Executive Summary. McCormick Tribune Foundation.
Wolfe, Arnold S., Jeromy Swanson and Stacy Wrona. “What the American people deserve from American journalism during wartime: A First Amendment view abetted by semiotic analysis”. Journalism Studies. 2008: vol. 9, no. 1. 38-56.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Media-Military Critique Topic
So I won't forget, this is my topic for my media critique paper...
The media's responsibility regarding wartime coverage and how it's changed post-Vietnam to present and how embedding (particularly Bush's 2003 embedding strategy) has influenced this change.
The media's responsibility regarding wartime coverage and how it's changed post-Vietnam to present and how embedding (particularly Bush's 2003 embedding strategy) has influenced this change.
Beat Article
"Economy affects WSU endowments"
By Jimmy Blue
The Daily Evergreen
"Few rough roads lie ahead for Pullman"
By Taras Zhulev
The Daily Evergreen
"Bernanke: recovery hinges on financial turnaround"
By Jeannine Aversa
The Seattle Times
By Jimmy Blue
The Daily Evergreen
"Few rough roads lie ahead for Pullman"
By Taras Zhulev
The Daily Evergreen
"Bernanke: recovery hinges on financial turnaround"
By Jeannine Aversa
The Seattle Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)