Invested Journalist Talks Coffee

A Seattle based chain of ‘Starbucks’ coffee underwent a financial struggle that had set the company’s plans for development back by five years. An Investigative reporter finds the truth on the matter based off early hunches.

Melissa Allison, journalist of the Seattle Times, was given permission by her newspaper to go investigate overseas in order to search for reasons why ‘Starbucks’  franchise had been unable to build new coffee shops in India. Local ‘Starbucks’ representatives had promised new coffee houses in 2006, but the first ‘Starbucks’ was not built until October of last year. “At the time, there was all this speculation that their application with the Indian government had fallen through,” Allison claimed, “or they had a partner they didn’t like.” Allison began her research in India by interviewing the local coffee growers and workers there. She asked them questions about their living conditions, in order to gain insight on farm production and the overall demand for coffee in India. Since the majority of American coffee comes from Latin America, Allison suspected that ‘Starbucks’ must have found difficulties while pursuing their project due to the Indian plantation’s poverty, and lack of coffee bean imports. Allison also made calls to Indian Plantation owners, and it was around that time that she realized the problem arrived not from the plantation’s poverty, but the poverty from the franchise itself. ” Now we know that it’s because they hit a financial speed bump and they pulled back on their US stores.” said Allison. Allison was also given a 15,000 grant from the International Foundation of Seattle for her story on the ‘Starbucks’ chain. which not only paid for Allison’s trip, but also allowed the ‘Times’ to add new columns such as “The Seattle Globalist”. Jim Simon, assistant managing editor for the Seattle Times, stated “This is the first time we ever received a grant for a broad area of coverage,” then added, “They give us very broad parameters for the types of stories we want to run.”

Allison’s story was a great achievement for her local newspaper as well as newpapers everywhere, but what if Allison never found her story? Would it be worth the risk for a journalist to make expenses in order to pursue international and better news? How far would you have gone compared to Allison’s investigative reporting, and would you have gone to the same places?

Bending Rules Can Lead to Deaths

Bands playing, drinks being poured, and couples dancing pretty much sums up The Nightlife.

The Nightlife allows young people to let loose and forget all their worries for just one night. They hit the clubs in search for an unforgettable night that would ignite laughable stories the next day. Unfortunately, Brazil’s lively city of Santa Maria will only be mourning and telling stories of how loved ones lived.

Exceeding the room capacity of 691 people, Kiss Nightclub was booming with over 2,000 people Saturday night, everyone trying to get in and listen to the band Gurizada Fandangueira play. What happened next was nowhere near cheering and applauses, but rather screams of horror and pushing and shoving.

The band ended one of their songs with pyrotechnic effects, causing the ceiling to catch on fire. The blazing fire spread quickly and over 2,000 people started running towards the only known exit. With the lights quickly burning out and the exit sign not clearly marked, people started running in all sorts of directions. To make things worse, some fire extinguishers were fake and had expired licenses.

As everyone tried to rush out Kiss nightclub, many stumbled and fell by the exit, causing people to either be trampled on or get stuck in the building with the fire quickly growing. Many ran towards the bathroom for safety, while others tried making holes in the walls, but there was no use.

The fire claimed the life of 234 people. Phones ringing, people searching for their loved ones, firefighters breaking down walls, the aftermath was difficult to see. As family members rushed to the scene to identify the bodies, they wanted explanations.

The investigation is still going on, trying to figure out what started the fire. The co-owner of Kiss nightclub, Mauro Hoffman was taken into custody for questioning.

This is not the first case people hear about fires at nightclubs. Many nightclubs have also been burned down all over the worlds mainly because of pyrotechnic effects. Not only that, but many die in these incidents because people bend the rules of safety. People need to be aware that there are safety guidelines for a reason and it can help save people’s lives. There has to be more safety check-ups on nightclubs, so these incidents stop claiming people’s lives.

People also need to be aware of their surroundings when they go to a packed event. We have to be aware of where the exit signs are and know that if we see something unsafe in a situation, to leave immediately.

But who is to blame for the Kiss nightclub fire?

Could it have been the guards, since they stopped people from leaving because they hadn’t paid yet? Could it have been the owner of Kiss Nightclub, who knew the room capacity and that the fire extinguishers were expired? Or could it have been the band Gurizada Fandangueira, who were aware that fireworks weren’t allowed in the club, yet used them anyway? People want answers and the current debate is, should everyone be responsible for the death of those people or should Hoffman take all the blame?

Is the Media to Blame?

With mass murder shootings becoming more frequent and real, some believe the media is to blame for the fame of the shooters.

With mass shootings like in Newtown, Connecticut or Aurora, Colorado there is always a “master mind” or plan behind it. Or at least that is what these shooters believe they are. And so do their copy cats. Executive VP, Wayne LaPierre of the NRA states that these shooters are now receiving the sense of identity they have been craving. Recently a petition has been filed to stop the printing of the shooters information, no names or faces. The signers believe, along with many others, the media’s hype of this person is the reason the shootings are still taking place. They have become some sort of an idol.

With that said, in order for the information to be withheld, which is so unheard of, there would have to be a complete vow of silence from every reporter or journalist and police officer. No details could be released, nothing to suggest this person is any different than another. No history or even the type of gun used.

If this vow of silence does work, how are reporters suppose to do their job? The public has a right to know what is going on in their town, yes? So what is the difference between this petition to stop mass murders names from being leaked and the petition Trayvon Martin’s parents have set up, trying to convict his killer? Would this just happen with mass murders or celebrities, or would it be the standard for every shooting and killing from now on?

Journalists under scrutiny for posting names of Sandy Hook shooters

Following the Sandy Hook tragedy, the question as to whether the names of the shooters of these sorts of incidents should be made public worked its way through social media.

The notion is that perpetrators of violent crimes such as the Sandy Hook shooting should not given any attention themselves, such as posting the name of the Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza. It is believed that part of the motivation for mass killers such as Lanza comes from the wanting of attention and that by posting the names publicly, the media is catering to such killers. 

The Vice-President of the national Rifle Association, Wayne LaPierre, also said in a press conference how restraining the media from posting names would help prevent copy cat killers from being inspired by shooters such as Lanza.

Although the idea has been gaining some circulation, there are still those that oppose it because it violates the First Amendment. Other reasons are made by journalists such as Christopher Hanson at American Journalism Review, who said that it creating this form of censorship would making creating a coherent story incredibly difficult.

Without some form of media, we would never hear about these types of tragedies, but how much of the story does the public need to hear? Is it a threat to our own safety and the safety of others to post the names of killers because it might inspire someone else to commit a crime? Would censoring news media be a step in harming the free press in the long run?

New Perception and Reinstated Focus on Climate Change

In a 2012 study from New York University and Temple University, a correlation was found between the public’s belief in climate change and the portrayal of local weather in news media.

The study, “Turning Personal Experience into Political Attitudes: The Effect of Local Weather on Americans’ Perceptions about Global Warming,” gathered data from five national opinion based surveys through the Pew Research Center. Local weather was concluded to have the greatest influence on belief in climate change when compared to other factors including age, race, and level of education.

 The surveys also demonstrated that a shift in local temperatures between below 4.3 degrees and above 14.7 degrees of the normal temperature increased an individuals chance in believing there is evidence to support global warming by 5 percent.

The study also portrayed that a person’s level of political awareness affects how he connects personal experience with global issues, with those in the middle ground feeling the greatest connection between personal experience and global issues. The state of the environment is undeniably a global issue, so it will be interesting to see how President Obama’s reinstated focus on the environment, as demonstrated by his second inaugural speech, will affect the public’s belief and perception of climate change. Both national and local news sources granted coverage to Obama’s speech increasing the public’s political awareness of the environmental issues he presented.

The issue of climate change is taking the forefront in his second term. “We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” Obama said. His attention to the environment may serve to lend credence to this debated issue for many non-believers, increase coverage of the environment in the news media, and give even further meaning to the weather on local news stations. 

Will an executive focus on the environment increase support for conservation and for evidence of climate change? Do you think support from an authoritative figure for the belief in climate change can have more influence than personal experience such as change in local temperatures?

Publishing Private Information in the Aftermath of Sandy Hook

In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Shooting, the issue of gun control was given a considerable amount of attention. One publication, The Journal News, actually went so far as to publish a map of with both the names and addresses of people who had registered gun permits.

As New York Times author David Karp mentions in his coverage of the incident, this publication brings about a number of ethical issues. Yes, the American people do have access to information on registered gun permits. Yes, The Journal News did not do anything illegal when they published the map. However, we as journalists have to ask ourselves if the behavior The Journal News exhibited was ethical.

Why? First of all, the map and accompanying article were published at a time when the issue of gun control was very sensitive. Publishing a map declaring to the world the whereabouts of gun owners could put those gun owners in danger.

However, the map can go more ways than one. Now, in addition to information about who does own a gun permit in Westchester County, Pa., citizens also have access to an aggregated collection of the addresses of those people who do not own guns. Does doing so put these citizens in danger? It is an issue that the publication of the map brings to light, and one that must certainly be discussed.