I will freely admit that, during my first two years of college, I wasn’t exactly devoted to my academics. But I doubt I was the only one. If you think about the attitude that most incoming college freshmen have, it seems only natural that schoolwork isn’t always their top priority, and I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. Part of going to college is moving away from home and out of your comfort zone, and I think the life lessons you learn along the way are equally important as fulfilling your core requirements.

For most students, the only people that they’ve ever had to share a house or mutual space with for longer than a week or two are their immediate family. There was usually a set schedule for your classes, your meals, and your extracurriculars. If you didn’t do your homework, it earned you some kind of punishment, and if you didn’t show up to class, you were in trouble. In college, all of that changes. There is no underestimating the personal responsibility that comes with moving away from home and having to make decisions that, although trivial, can ultimately shape who you are. Learning to be responsible for yourself and understanding that your parents, teachers, coaches, whoever aren’t there at every step to help you make every choice is something that is just as important as your academic growth.

By the same token, I understand that it’s important to study. Just because you’re getting involved and adapting socially doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be studying. I wish I could say I had any idea as to how to change this trend and make students more aware of their grades and the importance of their academics, but I think part of going to college is that it’s no one’s job to make you realize that academics are important. It’s your own job. Until students are willing to dedicate more of their time to studying and getting good grades, then that 45 percent isn’t going anywhere. I’m just arguing that, despite floundering grades, those two years aren’t a total waste.

I know varying age groups are reading this blog, so I’m sure there’s got to be some varying opinions that go along with that. You know I love comments!

Morning news shows are going to be my target here, only because I’ve been watching them more often. This has to do largely with the fact that I have an earlier wake-up call now than before, but also because it’s a constant topic of conversation at work for my department—which morning news show do you prefer and why? I’m about two weeks into my ‘research’ and although I think the CBS ‘Early Show’ is winning my affections, I really don’t prefer any of them. If ‘Good Morning America’, ‘Today’, and the ‘Early Show’ were fast-food restaurants, they would be the perfect target for the all-white-meat-chicken chain, because these morning ‘news’ shows are FULL of fillers and fake.

Journalism at its finest

Case in point: the 10:00 hour of ‘Today’ features Hoda Kotb (who used to actually cover real news stories) and Kathie Lee Gifford, who are known for their signature glasses of wine in the morning and who spend their show dishing celebrity gossip and exploring the pressing topics like the effectiveness of a manure facial. Come on; is no one else even remotely bothered by the fact that these women have airtime? Last week, the ‘Early Show’ had a comfort food cook-off, where the anchors competed to make their own ice cream and see whose flavor was the best. Cute? Sure. News? No.

I don’t want to say that few people pick up a newspaper anymore, but everyone knows that fewer people do. It’s the reason why so many publications have folded and seasoned journalists are back to square one in the job hunt. People want their news and they want it now. During my second semester in college, I remember taking the train to work, and instead of commuters reading the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal, heck even the Inquirer, they had their Metro newspapers. I know that Metro isn’t out to be anyone’s sole source of news, but the fact that it might be the only news someone reads all day helps to explain why people can’t be bothered with the real stuff anymore.

I’ve always thought that journalists have an awesome job. In my mind, and maybe this is a little egotistical, but journalists have the job of telling people what they need to know. That’s your job, our job, as journalists: to tell people what it is they need to know so that they can go into the world and understand it.

As of late, it seems like there’s been a little role reversal, and maybe that’s due to the fact that journalists are afraid of losing their jobs, so they cater to their audience, or maybe it’s just the way things are going to evolve, but it’s sad. It’s not the public’s job to tell us what they want to know, it’s not a journalist’s job to cater to their interests. That’s what magazines are for, that’s what your favorite channel is for…there are already media outlets that will match your hobbies or talents or whatever. Newspapers and news channels are meant to give you the news. Sure, stories about celebrities and softer news topics are going to matter, but they shouldn’t be the core of your programming.

Now that I’ve read this post again, it sounds like a break-up letter to the field of journalism. Don’t be fooled—I still have a passion for journalism and a love for the news. I just wish that there were more reporters and news outlets out there that stood for the same thing. And, as I said, I’m sure for some of them, changing their programming to cater to the masses isn’t always a choice. Maybe what I’m asking is that the public reconsiders the type of news they’re looking for.

I know there are people out there who read the news, and I know there are plenty of reputable outlets out there who deliver it. I just wish that we would reserve the title of journalist and the label of news for the stories and the people that can live up to them.

Anyway. I guess what I’m trying to say is that 2010 was a big year for me personally, but more so for me professionally. You can learn as much as you want in a classroom, but there are some things that you just have to learn on the job. Between that and actually finding a job to have, I think I’ve learned a lot, and I want 2011 to be the same way. So, in the spirit of Joe Grimm’s column, I’ve decided to come up with a list of my professional resolutions for 2011. And you, readers, can hold me to it

1. Learn how to use video software.
In college, we had television, radio and journalism programs; it was the Trinity of the communication program. I tried my hand at radio and failed miserably and I loved journalism, but I never got around to video. Unfortunately, I’m now learning how helpful it is to have some knowledge of video equipment and software. I’m not asking to be an ace, but I’m hoping to be able to have a working knowledge of it, since it’s bound to come up in my field.

My question to you, video mavens: What are the top three or four things I should know to be able to work with video? About all I can do is shoot with a Flip camera and make movies that way. Sad, I know. Any tips and recommendations would be much appreciated.

2. Go out of my writing comfort zone.
During my time with The Loquitur I wrote and edited all kinds of stories, but there were some sections that attracted a little more of my time. I always gravitated toward the Features/human interest-type stories and opinion pieces, because I liked that they were a little more fun to write, and the subject matter wasn’t above my head. Tomorrow, I’ll start my first freelance work for Patch’s Upper Macungie site, and I’ll be covering local events; again, not too far from the feature-y stories I’m used to. In 2011, I’d like to try and challenge myself to write about things that I’m not as familiar or comfortable with. One thing I am looking forward to is more sports writing. During my time with Patch, I’ll probably have a chance to do more sports stories that I did with The Loquitur, so I’m assuming that means I’m already on the right track to achieving Goal numero dos.

3. Land a full-time gig.
I’m currently working 40 hours/week and getting paid to do so, but I am more than ready for the day that I’m able to finally secure a salaried job with benefits. I enjoy what I’m doing, but I’m ready for a bigger income and some job security.

Now more than ever, I’m learning it’s not what you know, but who you know. So I guess, as a goal within a goal, I’m also going to make 2011 my year of making and keeping connections. I have some brand new business cards to help me out, too, which never hurts. So, may old acquaintances not be forgot(ten.)

 And I guess this paragraph is more of a reflection, but a lot of my friends from college took jobs doing something that I know that they would have never wanted to do, something so far from what they studied that it’s making them second-guess all that money they put towards a degree. And I understand for a lot of people, that’s a necessity; finding an income to pay off those students loans is more important than landing your dream job. But one thing that I’ve promised myself is that, in my job search, I won’t settle for not doing what I don’t want to do. I’m aiming to have a job within the realm of communications, whether it be in journalism, PR, the ever-growing field of social media, or a job as an editorial assistant or copy editor. If it takes me a little longer to find a job, then so be it. I don’t want to be stuck in a field I don’t enjoy because it was the first thing to come along. But I’m hoping that 2011 will be the year that my experience and searching will come to fruition, and I’ll be able to buy that brand new car

See? Now I’m held to these three resolutions because I’ve publicly declared them. Comments are always welcome, and invited, and, if you’re up for sharing, what are your professional resolutions this year?

Lately, though, I’ve been wondering if the use of social media is as encouraged or as popular in other fields. Yesterday, I saw an advertisement for a community class that read “What is Social Media’s Place in Medicine?” Today, in USA Today there was an article about the use social media in churches. When it comes to communications, social media is a tool, not a distraction, but I’ve begun to wonder whether its role in other fields is helpful or hurtful.

Obviously, the role is going to be dependent on the career. But I think it’s interesting that, since we’ve now given social media a little time to develop, so many occupations are finding ways to integrate it into their jobs, or not integrate it at all. I mean, I can fully understand why those in the medical field are wary. First of all, they have no right or responsibility to disclose what it is that they’re doing. Hospitals don’t need their residents TwitPic-ing themselves in surgery or summarizing a patient’s bizarre symptoms. Furthermore, I doubt they have the time to worry about whether or not using social media will make them obsolete because, well, hospitals aren’t ever going to be obsolete. If a hospital does have a Twitter feed, I would think it should probably look a lot like this. Detailing your accomplishments, posting jobs, passing on positive coverage; all of that seems like relatively safe content. I have to applaud people for recognizing that social media might cause a problem, and addressing it before it did.

The headline about pastors and priests using social media definitely threw me for a loop. I wasn’t expecting to read that even religion had a Facebook account. I’m still trying to figure out how I feel about the issue. I mean, it’s a good tool to get the word out there. For example, every year my church holds two festivals, one in summer and one in fall, and I suppose it might be helpful to remind followers (your congregation, I guess) that it’s coming up and what’s being offered. But by the same token, they also pass out a church bulletin every week and make community announcements that I think would probably serve the same purpose. Another reason churches might feel it necessary to become involved is to attract a younger crowd, which I’m sure it does on some occasions, but eh. I just can’t really warm up to Bible verses coming up on my Twitter feed and the homily posted as a Facebook Note. But, as the article points out, the church has warmed up to almost every other new technology before, so seeing how it ends up using social media will be interesting.

I’ve sounded off only on two, but I know there are plenty of other professions, companies, or people who probably have mixed feelings toward the way social media is affecting them. Have you heard of any other instances where social media has posed a problem, or provided a solution, in professions outside of communications?

I’ve been anxiously awaiting my turn to visit since April 12, 2008.

Finally, I got my turn to visit on December 13, 2010.

On the 12^th day of Christmas my true love gave to me…a trip to the Newseum. Yes, after two and a half years of waiting, my love for all things news culminated with a trip to the Newseum. I’m assuming most of you have probably heard of the Newseum already, if not visited it, but for those of you who have not, it’s exactly what it sounds like. It is seven stories’ worth of archived newspaper articles, radio broadcasts, pictures, video and artifacts that provide a look back into history’s biggest news stories.

Admittedly, I’m a nerd with these kinds of things. I would love to know where you were when Kennedy was shot, when the towers fell, when Obama was elected, when Katrina struck, when the millennium hit, etc. They’re all huge parts of history, and individual recollections fascinate me. So a museum dedicated to events like these? Come on; you knew I’d love it. I could probably write a very long-winded blog post about all the things to see there, but I don’t want to spoil the surprise, so I thought I’d take a different approach to describing my visit yesterday, and give you the list of The Top Three Things You NEED to See at the Newseum, according to the Newseum PR people. (See? There’s perks to reading blogs like mine-you get the inside scoop.)

1. The 9/11 Exhibit

A piece of WTC tower

Upon hearing that there was a 9/11 exhibit, my interest was already peaked, but Newseum PR giving it the stamp of approval was really what made me think it must be something special. These people deal with unbelievably sensitive subject matter, so to stress this particular exhibit was what coaxed me into seeing it. And I’m so glad I did. The Newseum actually has a piece of one of the WTC towers and the Pentagon, and an entire wall dedicated to front pages nationwide and worldwide on September 12. It’s amazing to look back now and see that and actually remember where you were, and recount your memories of what happened on 9/11. I’m not one to get sentimental, but it’s incredibly moving. And while all of these parts of the exhibit were fantastic, what proved to be probably the most emotional and well-done piece in the exhibit, at least for me, was the documentary that was created specifically for the exhibit.

I’ve seen the footage of the planes hitting the towers; I remember seeing it in my sixth-grade classroom and news stations use the footage almost every year on the anniversary. But what I saw in this documentary was honestly something I had never seen before. I saw the second plane hit the towers, and I saw them crumble, and I saw raw footage of things that I had never seen before. Newseum PR told us that the movie was so emotional, they had begun to place tissues outside because there was never a dry eye. Seriously, if you ever visit the Newseum, this is the exhibit you need to see. It’s a somber reminder of things that happened, but it’s wonderfully done and put together.

2. Pulitzer Prize-Winning Photography

Any journalist knows what an important asset good photography is to a story. So it’s only fitting that there be a part of the Newseum that is dedicated strictly to photography. It’s an awesome display of pictures that most people probably recognize by now, but were also just another picture to the photographers who took them. They had no idea that the next picture they were going to take would turn out to be one of the most popular photos ever; they were just doing their job, and the people in them were regular people. I think that’s what struck me so much about that exhibit.

I don’t want to tell you everything, but some of the pics in the gallery included iconic headshots of Marilyn Monroe, the soldiers at Iwo Jima, Elian Gonzalez in the closet (remember that?!), and a POW returning home. You can get a peek at them here).

3. Unabomber’s Cabin/Hurricane Katrina

So this was a tie on behalf of our PR buddies, and, unfortunately, I only had the chance to see one of them. In the FBI exhibit, which was one of my favorites, there are mementos you wouldn’t believe: the ransom note Patty Hearst’s kidnapper left, a replica of the car used during the DC sniper attacks, and the Unabomber cabin, which was simultaneously cool and extremely creepy. (If you don’t know the story of the Unabomber, read it here). To me, the fact that the Newseum was able to have the actual cabin Kaczynski was living in is, I think, so cool. The FBI exhibit is home to so many pieces of history that are the real thing, not a replica, not an exact copy, the actual thing. A museum that preserves that is one worth visiting.

Unfortunately, I was unable to see the Katrina exhibit while I was there. However, I’ve heard it’s an amazing exhibit, both from people at the Newseum and people who have visited. What makes it so popular, I think, is the same thing that makes the 9/11 exhibit so popular. Most of us were alive to remember it.

If you haven’t gotten to visit the Newseum yet, you HAVE to go. And bring me, too. I’ll gladly spend a day seeing all the things I didn’t get a chance to yet. And if you have been to the Newseum, what am I leaving out?

But I’ve always circled back to a particular dilemma, a twilemma, if you will. (Please don’t stop reading—I promise to avoid that type of thing for the remainder of this post.) As a journalist/PR person/news nerd/whatever, I know that I should probably be generating some really great content on my feed, providing links to other people’s content, and the like. But I also crave the more lighthearted content that graces my feed, and I know I’ll never be able to fully stray from my irreverent, NSFW, opinion-driven tweets, either. The thing is, the latter tweets aren’t always my proudest moments, or ones that I want my co-workers, future employers, and people of a similar ilk to see. So my question to you, readers, tweeters, bloggers, is this: two feeds or one?

Maybe you’re someone who is tired of seeing that I blogged or that I’m overly interested in social media and you wish I would stop re-tweeting people and clogging your Twitter feed with my attempt at professionalism. Maybe you’re someone who found my blog, thought I had good content, then went to my Twitter and saw I really don’t always tweet as best I should. Instead, you found an irreverent comment about my perpetually annoying roommate. So I figure there’s no better group to ask than you.

I would love to see some comments. Love to, love to. They don’t have to be long or explanatory. Just help me decide…one feed or two feeds?

This irritation hasn’t really come out of nowhere. Having spent the past four months as part of a PR team, I’ve had plenty of conversations about bloggers, and not all of them have been positive. See, during college, I was taught to blog because it was going to help me get a job and establish some credibility. I saw absolutely beautiful multimedia blogs done by journalism students my own age, and I saw web sites, portfolios and resumes that boasted knowledge of blogging platforms that I couldn’t even pronounce correctly. But, now that I’ve been part of the blogosphere for awhile, I’ve begun to realize that for every fantastic blog there is out there, journo-centric or otherwise, there are about 100 irrelevant blogs to go along with it.

I know there’s no way to silence all the mommy bloggers out there, but I think that more people need to start worrying about the idea of blogging and instead examine why they’re choosing to do it in the first place. Everyone has their own URL now; it’s as common as having a cell number or a personal computer. Bloggers have to do something to make themselves stand out from all of the other noise out in the blogosphere, and I challenge every blogger, including myself, to re-think the material they’re putting forth.

In my senior year, I felt a lot of pressure to create a blog because I knew it was going to be a good way for me to stand out from the millions of other journalism graduates. Except for the fact that, you know, every one of those ones was being encouraged to do the same thing. I see now a lot of underclassmen who I knew are also trying to get their blogs off the ground, too, in hopes that it becomes a one-up for them. But the thing that no one is telling them, or thousands of other beginners, is that a blog is only worth creating if you have something to say. If you don’t, it’s a web site with lukewarm content that people are going to associate you with. You remember the line ‘If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all?’ Think of it this way instead: ‘If you don’t have anything to say, don’t say anything at all.’ Don’t create content just to say you did it. People can see right through poorly-constructed posts and transparent thoughts. I’ve been guilty of this, too, but ultimately I think that it comes down to the quality of your posts, not the quantity.

I don’t want to blog a hate-post about bloggers, as I feel like that’s probably not the best angle to take with an audience who undoubtedly is composed mainly of bloggers (how many times can you use ‘blog’ in one sentence?) so let me look at blogging from a positive angle, too. This is probably one of the best times to be a blogger. You can get paid to do just that, and there are PR teams that are seeking out topic-specific bloggers everyday. You might not get paid for helping them out, but you’ll get some pretty sweet perks. I know this because yesterday, I delivered some blogger swag bags, and let’s just say it was better than my Christmas list. If you’re producing good content and you have a loyal following and an established reputation, you stand to have a better chance at networking with people who might be able to make your hobby into your career. There are great opportunities that come with blogging, but signing up for a username and password doesn’t automatically put you in the running.

Although I probably should have said this at the beginning of my very long-winded post, the people I’m really targeting with this are people who have created blogs to further their career or to network. Some people create blogs for the fun of it, and even though I wish the majority of them would disappear, too, there are definitely some must-reads out there for me. I’m looking at you Kelsey Chapp. Creating a blog that your friends can read is a good idea, and an excellent platform for people to keep in touch. But for people who are looking to make an impression, make sure to ask yourself what it is that you’re blogging about and how passionate you really are before you decide to commit.

Disclaimer: If you’re going to leave me a comment and tell me I forgot something, you’re probably right. But the things I highlighted in this post seem to be the most buzzed-about items on my Twitter feed and Google Reader. Feel free to add to my list, though. I love knowing I have eyes reading this.

1. RockMelt
Although there really is no reason why I ordered this list the way I did, I definitely put RockMelt first because I love it oh-so-much. In short, it’s an Internet browser that prides itself on being social network saavy. When you first get RockMelt, you plug in your Facebook login info and stores it. It also makes Facebook the default homepage. You can opt out of remembering your info or having it as your homepage, but if you download a browser that boasts it’s ‘social’ then I doubt you’re that opposed. On the right side of the Internet window, there are small RSS feeds for Twitter and Facebook (no refresh button!) that let you check updates without leaving the site you’re on, and your Facebook friends who are on chat are listed in the left-hand side of the browser, even if you’re not on Facebook.

I love what I’ve seen of RockMelt so far, but I can already rattle off a list of changes I would like to see, including the inclusion of other social networks besides the big two and a faster speed. I realize all of this will most likely come with time, and I think RockMelt is capitalizing on Internet users like myself who are too obsessed (yes, I admit it) with online presence to care about the kinks. It’ll be interesting to see what it develops into.

2. Facebook’s Modern Messaging System
Facebook announced yesterday  that it would introduce a new message system to its users that would make it simpler to communicate in real-time. According to Zuckerberg, he talked to high school students who said they preferred text messages and instant messages to e-mail, and the introduction of the messaging system was to address that preference. I find it kind of interesting choice, since the average age of a Facebook user varies, and its hardly considered a network just for teenagers anymore. But then again, Mark Zuckerberg seems to know what he’s doing. I guess I’m not that impressed by the new Facebook development because I have yet to see it in practice. It’s usually hard for me conceive what exactly is going to change about the website until it actually changes, so maybe I’ll change my tune when it actually happens.

3. Path
Yesterday, ironically (and maybe purposefully) the same day Facebook announced their new development, Path made its debut, claiming to be the “anti-social network.” The new startup was headed by an ex-Facebook employee, and has some big-name investors, including Twitter fiend Ashton Kutcher. (I know- I just called Ashton Kutcher “big name.” For shame.) The new social network limits the number of friends a user can have to 50 people, after research determined that the brain could only maintain about 150 friendships. As of right now, the site is designed specifically for smartphone users. So, in other words, you can have 50 friends, but they have to be smartphone-friendly. Otherwise, find some new friends.

I think Path sounds like a good idea in theory, but I doubt it will pan out to be anything special. First of all, people don’t want only 50 friends. Think about it; as a society, we’re obsessed with knowing what people are doing at any point, all the time. I hate thinking that I’ve succumbed to that, but it’s true. And also, if the brain can handle up to 150 relationships, why are we setting the friend limit at 50?

4. HotSpot
Usually, I’m vehemently opposed to the idea of location-based services. I think it’s creepy to know that you just checked in at church or at the hair salon. And, quite frankly, I don’t care. I like to know what’s going on with people, but that’s just taking it too far. And unless you’re checking in somewhere really freaking cool, like the Vatican or the Grand Canyon (they came to mind first) then it’s probably not interesting to me. At all. That being said, even I’m a little intrigued by Google’s new ‘recommendation engine’ HotSpot. Instead of just being a location-based application, it allows you to get personalized results for your Google Places searches.

Say I’m a big fan of Applebee’s. If I’m traveling, or if I’m at home looking for a new restaurant to try, HotSpot will recommend somewhere for me based on my previous tastes. It’s not an idea that’s unheard of; think about iTunes’ Genius application that suggests music for you, or your other recommended purchases on your facvorite online store. But Google has taken that idea and applied it to places. Not so revolutionary, but a great idea. I can’t tell you how many times I would have liked to use this to find a new place to eat, a new bar to go to, or a new thing to do on a Friday night.

5. The Beatles Come to iTunes
After seven years’ worth of speculation as to will they/won’t they, the Beatles are FINALLY coming to iTunes. It’s been one of the most publicized holdouts, despite the fact that individual singles by the Fab Four have always been available. I know it’s a big deal, and I’m happy that I can finally find their music in the iTunes store, but I almost feel as though it’s not as big of an announcement as they might have hoped. I’ve already found other ways to get the Beatles onto my iPod by now, and I’m sure it’s the same story for many other iTunes users, too. However, as USAToday highlights, it will be a positive development for an older demographic who haven’t burned their CDs to the library, or who haven’t downloaded the music illegally by now. Even though I might be a little indifferent to the announcement, it’s true that the addition of the biggest pop group of the century is going to make a splash.

Like I said earlier, I know there must be things I’m leaving out. But to be able to participate in a conversation with other social media nerds like myself, I think my round-up provided you a pretty nice overview of what’s going on. So…what do you think about each of the subjects covered in this post? Agree, disagree? I want to hear you!