• Open Access close
• Closed Access close
• Restricted close
• Embargo close
• Publications close
• Research data close
• Research software close
• Other research products close
• Lecture close
• North American Studies close

This paper has as objective to give some directions on how journalists can regain their ‘lost hero status’. News outlets have to deal with an audience that lost confident in the news media. This reduced confidence may be explained by a reduced quality of journalism, driven by increased economic pressure, cutbacks in news gathering, and a decreased editorial autonomy. A historical event which is still cited as iconic for the mythical status of journalism is the news coverage about the Watergate affair. More specifically, there are the countless references to the work of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, two journalists who worked for the Washington Post at that time. They received their status as celebrity journalists primarily due to the best seller they have written in the course of the events, All the president’s men, and even more to the movie with the same title, with Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford as the lead actors. Although the affair lasted from 1972 to 1974, so today forty years ago, it still appeals to the imagination of anyone who thinks of what good journalism ought to be (to give just one example: a movie poster of All the President’s Men sticks to the apartment walls of journalist Katrine Fønsmark in the successful Danish TV series Borgen). Understanding the way of how Woodward and Bernstein dealt with the events might help to ‘upgrade’ the status of journalists today. The research questions are: What lessons can be learned from the way Woodward and Bernstein covered the events forty years ago? Are these practices still useful today, and if not, why not? This would give us a clue whether or not current journalists would still be able to break a story as Watergate. The method consists of a critical reading of the book of the two journalists, a literature review and personal meetings with Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein at the University of Texas Austin (that purchased and manages the archives of the two journalists). The paper is structured around ten statements on what a good journalists should do. Afterwards, all statements are refuted one by one. The erroneous statements are: 1. Journalists themselves are the greatest source of information (external nonprofessional sources are unreliable) 2. To find out the truth, the end justifies the means (and that goes beyond journalistic ethics) 3. If one threatens you with a lawsuit, you better watch your steps (you do not have a monopoly on the truth after all) 4. Base your story on interviews (and make sure you can quote your interviewees literally) 5. Press conferences provide all relevant information, and in addition, try to pick up information from expert sources (after all, they are organized to provide the press with information ready-to-use) 6. Postpone a story to a later moment in time makes no sense (your competitors will publish it anyway) 7. Make sure that if you bring a story you can also bring the wider picture (if you can’t do so, and the Why? Question remains unanswered, you better keep your mouth) 8. Partisan journalism cannot be objective (neutrality is preferred at any time) 9. A journalist operates in the shadows, like a fly on the wall (journalists that are in the spotlight make themselves suspicious) 10. Make sure that the sources you cite are verifiable (so that there is absolute transparency of sources) ispartof: ECREA's Journalism Studies Section Conference location:Thessaloniki, Greece date:28 Mar - 29 Mar 2014 status: published

ispartof: American Novelists’ Autobiographical Acts: Nonfictional Disruptions location:Aix-Marseille Université date:6 Jul - 7 Jul 2023 status: published

Phoebe Apperson Hearst měla velmi úspěšného vlastního syna Williama, který byl ale více jako jeho otec: tvrdý obchodník. Našla však jemnou, uměleckou duši v malíři Orrinu Peckovi (1860–1921), který byl údajně gay a který ji, ještě za života své vlastní matky, začal oslovovat „má druhá mámo.“ Na základě podrobného výzkumu jejich vzájemné korespondence v Peckově pozůstalosti se můžeme ptát, jak moc si byla progresivní, bohatá žena 19. století, jakou byla Phoebe Hearst, vědoma Peckovy sexuality a pokud ano, jestli s tím neměla problém, nebo šlo o nevyřčené tajemství mezi nimi? Jejich příběh představí historik umění Ladislav Zikmund-Lender. Phoebe Apperson Hearst had a very successful son of William, but he was more like his father: a tough businessman. However, she found a delicate, artistic soul in the painter Orrin Peck (1860–1921), who was allegedly gay and who, while still his own mother's life, began to address her as “my second mother.” Based on a detailed study of their correspondence in Peck's estate, we may ask how much a progressive, rich 19th-century woman like Phoebe Hearst was aware of Peck's sexuality, and if so, if she had no problem with it, or was it an unspoken secret between them? Their story will be presented by art historian Ladislav Zikmund-Lender.

ispartof: OpenCast Community Summit location:Valencia, Spain date:1 Mar - 3 Mar 2017 status: accepted

ispartof: BILETA Annual Conference location:online date:14 Apr - 16 Apr 2021 status: published

"Debemos unirnos a la resistencia mundial contra las políticas imperiales de las metrópolis" Recientemente nuestro compañero y amigo el joven internacionalista y estudiante de la Maestría de Estudios Latinoamericanos, del Instituto de Estudios Latinoamericanos, Bryan González Hernández ganó el concurso organizado por la Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, con su ensayo "Más allá del Libre Comercio: seguridad esencial". Para el joven estudiante Costa Rica se está enfrentando a un nuevo modelo dictatorial en América Latina, caracterizado por su fascismo simpático. Por medio de esta entrevista el grupo estudiantil Alternativas U, rinde homenaje al joven estudiante que a través de su reciente victoria, abre cada vez más espacios a los y las jóvenes que dentro y fuera de las Universidades plantean sus/nuestras alternativas, rompiendo tanto con el pensamiento único derechista, como con la "aristocracia académica" de cierta izquierda de nuestra Universidad. UCR::Vicerrectoría de Investigación::Unidades de Investigación::Ciencias Sociales::Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales (IIS)

In 1939, due to WWII and the Nuremberg Laws, the revolutionary Czech structural engineer Jaroslav J. Polívka arrived in the United States. After his arrival, he started a research job at UC Berkeley, renewed his engineering practice, and offered his services to the US military as many businesspersons did during this era. Polívka worked for Henry Kaiser who turned Richmond, CA, into a vibrant, fast developing workers city. New residential districts, hospitals, hangars, docks, and warehouses were built there. Henry Kaiser approached the structural development of the city in the same way he revolutionized the construction of battleships: from prefabricated, standardized parts. He supported research and development of new technologies. Mobile, round-shaped hospitals from prefabricated aluminum frames were one of the results of that research. In 1946, Jaroslav J. Polívka introduced himself to the “starchitect” Frank Lloyd Wright. A productive mutual co-operation that lasted 13 years and resulted in eight spectacular projects had started and Polívka, who had been working on extensive research both at UC Berkeley and Stanford University, came up with many technological, structural, and material innovations over the period. In 1957, Henry Kaiser funded the construction of one of the two geodesic domes designed by Richard Buckminster Fuller in Hawaii and in the process he invited Frank Lloyd Wright to consult the project. Jaroslav J. Polívka was probably in direct contact with Fuller, since he wanted to include him in his unfinished project of an encyclopedia of the world-famous structural engineers. On this particular story and a social matrix evolving around Henry Kaiser and Frank Lloyd Wright, the lecture seeks to rethink architectural global modernism as a cooperative project rather than a series of individual innovations manifested by isolated genius figures.

Im März 1926 hat Siegfried Kracauer einen in der Frankfurter Zeitung veröffentlichten Artikel under dem Titel “Kult der Zerstreuung: Über die Berliner Lichtspielhäuser”. Dieser Text ist keine Verteidigung der derzeitigen Unterhaltungsindustrie, sondern ein Versuch, den Begriff der Zerstreuung von seinem üblichen pejorativen Sinne zu retten, um zu verstehen, wie die Massen ihre Emanzipation durch den Film erleben können. Wir werden untersuchen, wie diese kritische Stellungnahme auch eine Antwort auf die Steigerung der Propaganda in Europa durch die Staatsapparate ist, die im Gegensatz zu Kracauers Zerstreuung die Massen unausweichlich entfremden. Wir werden deshalb auch diesen Artikel von 1926 mit dem 1942 von Kracauer geschriebenen Text über die Nazipropaganda (“Propaganda und der nazistische Kriegsfilm”) verknüpfen. Letztendlich möchten wir zeigen, wie der “Kult der Zerstreuung” ein politisches Werkzeug für unsere Zeiten ist, in denen Politiker wie etwa Donald Trump oft durch Zerstreuung regieren, in dem sie die Massen von ihren wirklichen Alltagsproblemen entfernen.