Aeropress - The Mini Coffee Maker

While I would love to spend my days buying cappuccinos and enjoying the café lifestyle, the reality is it can get pretty expensive paying $4 per coffee, and sometimes I’d rather just stay in my PJs and enjoy a coffee at home.

So what are the options? Well you could buy yourself a domestic coffee machine and grinder. While this would require a fairly large financial investment (if you wanted a good one of course, and not one that gives you substandard coffee and is a drain on electricity) it would also require you to actually learn how to make it well - tamp properly, texture the milk so it’s micro-foam and how to adjust the grind. Of course you don’t need the training, and often when buying a domestic machine a basic course is included (I know Sunbeam has free courses with their machines), but if you’re going to make the investment, you might as well do it properly!

Alternatively you can get some handy little coffee makers that are cheap but still make a great cup of coffee. The latest thing I’ve come across is the Aeropress. It’s easy to use and you can make a decent cup pretty quickly. The best thing about it is you can alter the strength of the coffee you make. Therefore, you can either make yourself a long black, or make it shorter and add milk for more of the latte taste.

In fact, just check out a quick demonstration on the Aeropress website:

The French Press

This is really just a variance from the traditional French press which is quite popular in Europe. The only difference is that it’s aimed more at individual cups of coffee. While that makes it not ideal for when company is over and you have to make numerous coffees, the upside is that you can constantly make yourself a fresh cup throughout the day.

I’m not going to lie, it doesn’t compare to a good coffee from a proper coffee shop, but I’d rather an Aeropress than Starbucks. Also, I’d rather stay at home, use some well roasted beans from my favourite coffee shop and enjoy the coffee at a fraction of the price. This is, therefore, a good alternative which is easy to use and not that expensive – plus it looks a bit quirky whenever someone comes over and you make them a cup!

Day One of the WBC

Day one of the World Barista Competition is well underway. Today, competition wise, is all about the baristas. With 54 countries having their representatives competing for the glory and the title of the World Champion the schedule is tightly packed. Starting off at 8am Vienna time (Australia is 8 hours in front, so it’s started at 4pm local time for us), the competitors go back to back for two days straight, finishing at 5pm each night.

For the running list of all competitors check out the World Barista Championship website, or the Day 1 and Day 2 schedule links are right here.

Aussie Craig Simon is first up on day two (tomorrow, Wednesday the 13^th). Local time he’ll be on at 4:15pm sharp, so don’t miss him – live stream all the action!

Other Aussie competitors Fred Lullfitz and Matt Perger are also on tomorrow. Cup tasters will be from 10am-3pm, and the Brewers Cup will be from 12pm-4pm.

I’ll surely be watching all the action, so I’ll keep you all updated as the results come in.

The Grande Finale

The final lecture. What a journey it has been this semester going through the aspects of journalism for this introduction course. To mark this final lecture we had guest lecturer Steve Molk, the creator of MolksTVTalk.com.

To me, it seemed like an unprepared, prepared lecture - basically it felt so laid back that it seemed like Steve was just chatting to us, but really he imparted some good info to advise us what was happening in relation to social media and other new media methods.

So, let’s look at some of the interesting stuff he said…. Firstly his comment on Channel 7 and 9 and their reports on Kevin Rudd’s leadership challenge; one said it was just gossip, the other said it would happen. Well kudos to the latter, you got it right! Interesting though, this is a great example of the underlying biases and agendas behind the news stations. Assumingly both got the same information, and both broadcast at the same 6pm timeslot, so the denial and promotion of the challenge really just came down to the editors in the news room – agenda setting if I ever saw it!

The majority of what Steve talked about was the rising social media. You only have to look at the influence that social media had in the Libyan revolution to see the impact that it has today. And of course, what about Kony? While it lasted, social media promoted the story to millions of people who before were oblivious to the actions of Kony towards children and other Ugandans. Even though the campaign became a bit of a flop in the end, the point I’m making is that people knew about it.

Steve said you can basically write about anything when you’re online – be it crap or specialised (or perhaps even specialised crap, who knows!). Unsurprising, this media form is taking over traditional media. The downside, however, is the deterioration of facts and legitimate sources. Let’s face it, it’s a lot easier to speculate and post your ideas online than it ever was to post in a newspaper, magazine, TV or even say on the radio.

When it comes down to it, the blogs that we’re doing for assessments really aren’t that different to the blogs that people get paid for… perhaps just more freedom to write about what you want and putting in your own opinions, and not those of whom you are working for. Let’s look at the example Steve presented to us of Mia Freedman. Her blog is called Momma Mia, and this, along with another site, has 900,000 views per month. Imagine the advertising opportunities from that! Of course it didn’t just happen overnight, this took about five years to reach the audience it does, but that kind of market well exceeds that of TV influence or newspaper… plus it has a target audience, not just random distribution.

There are upsides and downsides to online news. For one, it doesn’t have a word limit, which means bloggers and other online communication outlets can be as long and in detail as need be. This also means people like me can waffle on about lecture content in great depth and bore those who are reading it (doing alright there Bruce? Not bored yet are you?). Alternatively, if you’re on Twitter you’ve got a character limit making it difficult to get your point across if you don’t put links to other pages in your tweets. What this also means though, is that you’ve got easy access to follow future employers or contacts/sources. This makes networking so much easier… even allowing the old saying of “it’s not what you know, but who you know” to be achieved so much easier.

It’s interesting to see, also, the use of Twitter from celebrities. Michael Clarke posted his wedding announcements and photos on Twitter rather than selling it to the media. Journalists no longer get exclusives and need sources “close to the family” to confirm the event. No, all you need to do is follow your celebrities and influential people and wait for them to Tweet or Facebook what you want to know (or maybe even Instagram a photo!).

All I can say now is that I’m looking forward to getting a career from journalism. Just the way Steve was talking about Tweeting people like Will Anderson and getting an hour interview as a result is incredible. He does what he loves and gets paid for - I hope I can do the same! 

Brisbane's Hot Shot Barista

Just doing some shameless, self promotion. This is a video I made for JOUR1112. It's on the Australian Latte Art Champion, Scott Luengen. 

I realise it's a terrible piece of journalistic work BUT it explains what the competition entails and also contains some nice latte art. While Scott was not in the right place to do his award winning patterns (I may have bothered him at work!) you can check out his routine from the Australian Latte Art Championships.

World Barista Championship

Fresh from the social networking sphere, the 2013 spots for the world barista championships have been announced! 


It's the first day of the 2012 World Barista Championships in Vienna, where the world's best baristas, brewers, cup tasters and roasters will be fighting out to progress through the different rounds and into finals day on Friday. The first battle, however, has already been fought with the bid to host the 2013 world competitions being announced only a few hours ago.


The most exciting news is that Melbourne, Australia, will be host to the 2013 World Barista Championship and Brewers Cup in May next year. The result, while not surprising in view of the great competition that was this year at the Melbourne International Coffee Expo, Australia did take the bid from hot contenders Puerto Rico... needless to say, I most certainly will be making an appearance there next year!

The Latte Art Championship, Coffee in Good Spirit, Cup Tasting and Roasting Championship will be hosted in France in June next year, a big difference from Seoul, Korea this year in November.

For now though, let's keep our eyes on this years competition with Aussies Craig Simon, Matt Perger and Fred Lullfitz representing their country this week.

To keep up to date with all the action, don't miss the live streaming on the WBC website!

Let's Look Into That

Investigative journalism is the form of journalism whereby a specific topic is examined in great depth, usually those of crime, political corruption and corporate misconduct. Ross Coulthart’s quote sums up my thoughts exactly:

“Isn’t all journalism meant to involve questioning investigation of facts and opinions presented to us?”

And Lord Northcliffe answers the question so well

“… what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is just advertising.”

So, what do you need to have to be an investigative journalist? Simply you need an “in”… or more precisely, five “in’s”. You need to be intelligent, informed, intuitive, inside and invest yourself in the story. Really, they’re all quite self-explanatory. Intelligent as you need to think about the issues, who’s involved, and the logical outcomes. Informed as you need to be in the know and what has happened in the past (or what may happen before it has from insight). Intuitive so that you pick up on things others might not and use that gut feeling. Inside so that you know what’s happening as a primary source, and not second hand and invest, your time, money and efforts to get to the bottom of the story.

Alright, so let’s look at the deeper definitions and purpose of investigative journalism. In our lecture four aspects were identified.

1.       Critical and thorough Journalism – the key is active intervention; the journalists are active participants and are thorough and make a substantial effort in obtaining the story and its facts

2.       Custodians of conscience – the key is exposure; civic vice is exposed for society to respond

3.       To provide a voice for those without one and hold the powerful to account – the key is public interest; to bring about social justice by giving a voice to the voiceless and power to the powerless

4.       Fourth branch of govt/”watchdog”/Fourth estate –

a.       Fourth branch of govt as journalists allow free flows of information necessary for the functioning democracy by bringing accountability to the judiciary, executive and legislative branches. This is especially prevalent in view of QLD no longer having a senate and also the mass majority in the lower house (only house, more like it) from the latest election.

b.      “Watchdog” as they again create accountability for public personalities and institutions whose functions impact social and political life. The question though, can they be held to much account in a “one paper town” like Brisbane… In view of online news being so prevalent, I don’t see why not!

c.       Fourth Estate as journalists represent those without power to balance the power of the government. Interesting to note that the other estates, in order in which they were presented and constructed according to the French social constructs of ancient times, were religion, the monarch and the people. In my mind, the fourth estate is really the joining factor which keep the other estates informed or bring sheltered/manipulated from the other estates (especially in view of media’s agenda setting)

To achieve this, you have to be prepared to get out there and search for the information (shoes leather journalism). You have to stand back and look at the big picture, while taking nothing for granted. You must question and be critical, however, there’s a distinct difference between being cynical and sceptical in obtaining a story and information; as an investigative journalist you want to be the latter. This is where it leads us back to our previous week’s lecture once again – CUT THROUGH THE AGENDA! Easier said than done. Even when we try and bypass specific media outlets inert biases and agendas, as individuals we all have inherent biases. Simply because we become journalists, it doesn’t mean these individual agendas are suppressed.

 

Agendas aside, let’s look at some of the big trailblazers of history. W.T. Stead wrote about the white slave trade and prostitution in the Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon campaign. The result of this was the raising of the age of consent from 12 to 16 – let’s not judge too quickly, back then girls got married off while in their teens!

Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein brought to light the “Watergate” scandal, whereby the Nixon administration was caught for conducting illegal acts such as bugging political opponent’s offices and harassment of political/activist groups. The story was brought was picked up by the two reporters after a break-in at the Watergate Complex in Washington, which resulted in the resignation of Nixon. The movie representation of the Watergate scandal (All the President’s Men) is a fantastic representation of investigative journalism; before internet and information was kept in hard copies only!

Let’s fast forward to today. We examined the example of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. While I, myself, would not classify his information dumping as journalism, the information which he obtained (somewhat illegally) has allowed for true investigative journalism into political topics. Quite frankly, the information itself would not have made such an impact if governments made such an issue over it. The glorification/demonization of Assange’s action made WikiLeaks major news. It wasn’t until the Apache helicopter attack in Iraq that WikiLeaks became front page news, and with that it brought media and journalistic attention; only because of that has some sort of social justice come about.

While it’s not exceptionally prominent amongst the vast array of news stories every day, investigative journalism can still be found in sites such as The Global Mail, Crikey and Australian Story.

So how do we investigate? The old saying goes:

If your mother says she loves you, check it out

Basically this just means you always have check your facts – never assume anything! This also means be wary of your sources. Whistle blowers have a reason for coming out and sharing their story, with important information comes much risk and responsibility; the advice to journalists is to expect whistle blowers to be or go crazy.

The most straightforward ways of collecting information is to conduct numerous interviews, make observations, obtain/view documents, attend briefings and use leaks to your advantage, but if it alright to trespass and steal information? Surely, viewing it from a utilitarian standpoint, if the outcome is better for the greater society then it’s allowed… but sadly no, we still have to follow the rules if we want to be ethical journalists. The bottom line is, does what you were told, what you saw and what was recorded line up? If the answer is no, then get investigating!

As I’ve mentioned in other posts, the increase of online and new media changes the face of journalism. We want up-to-date news; as it happens. With this comes less time for investigative journalists to do their jobs. Saying that, the Four Corners’ report on cattle export was one of the biggest news stories last year and it was a piece of investigative journalism. Furthermore, the PR effect is also having an effect. With churnalism rates extremely high in some publications, it shows a lack of questioning and research into information and even the sources from which it’s obtained. This again puts a damper on investigative journalism in society.

As we progress further into the technology age I can’t help but wonder if the news stories we will be exposed to will be primary agenda ridden and full of PR. With less time for even the consumers of news to sit and question what we see, the more likely it is we take in information without thinking. Despite the numerous and varying outlets of information we can access in the palm of our hands, we still just stick to the good ‘ol news sites that we visit every day, and sometimes even zone our when the pyramid of information starts to taper into the less interesting. If consumers do this, why are journalists even going to bother searching for the hidden truths in the political, criminal and corporate webs of deception? 

The Not So Hidden Agenda?

The fundamental problem of communication is that of reproducing at one point either exactly or approximately a message selected at another point Claude Shannon

I’m not going to question the influence media has on our lives. It’s everywhere; from our TV to out laptops and even our mobile phones. It’s no longer even about going onto to look at specific news stations or sites, we see it on our news streams on Facebook and Twitter. But, of course, from the millions of stories which happen every day, only a certain amount makes it to the news. While news values plays a large role in what stories we see and how much significance is placed on them, there is no question that the public, policy, corporate and media’s agendas play a role in what society sees and hears.

Before we look into agenda setting, let’s first look at what we mean by it. What we perceive as reality has been constructed through communication using shared language. We see, hear, read, type, say and even enact information which we’ve come across, and this shapes what we understand society to be. Basically an individual’s reality exists in the social relationships they engage in. The media play a large role in ‘constructing’ or ‘mediating’ the social world as we understand it. However, every person, company or group has a vested interest or preferred outcome they wish to see achieved, and this is where agendas come out to play.

When discussing mass media and agenda setting, there are two basic assumptions. Firstly that the mass media does not merely reflect and report reality, but also filters and shapes it, and secondly, that media concentrates on a few issues and subjects leads the public to perceive those issues as more important than other issues.

As Katherine Miller states in Communication Theories: Perspectives, Processes and Contexts, there are four interrelated agendas in society:

1.       Public – Topics that members of the public perceive as important

2.       Policy – Issues that decision makers are salient, that is, the legislators

3.       Corporate – Issues that big business and corporations consider important

4.       Media – Issues discussed in the media

In relation to Rogers and Dearing’s 1988 agenda setting theory, in which they only proposed three types of agenda setting and did not incorporate the corporate agenda, they argued that the policy agenda was primary a result of the public and media’s agenda. They argued that policy makers base their decisions on what society deems important and what issues are discussed in the media. I believe this to be a simplistic view. As Coleman, McCombs, Shaw and Weaver put it

“Agenda setting is the process of the mass media presenting certain issues frequently and prominently with the result that large segments of the public come to perceive those issues as more important than others. Simply put, the more coverage an issue receives, the more important it is to people.”

When it comes down to it, the media has to meet public interests, but the media can manipulate and bring importance to issues to get public response. Also, when we look to the policy makers, while they have to get public votes, by bringing their views and opinions to the media they can create a fiasco of public interest and debate. Of course, as Miller adds in, corporations and business have the power and money to alter public perceptions and even government policy. For Rogers and Dearing to say that it’s a one way influence is a very short sighted and doesn’t scrape the surface of the agendas which influence society.

In the 1920s Harold Lasswell introduced the “Magic Bullet” model of agenda setting. Despite having limitations of not considering free thought the differences we as individuals have in cognitive thinking (that is, thinking we would all just swallow the information the same way) this hypodermic needle idea illustrates the idea well.

“The press may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about”(Bernard Cohen,1963)

“Propaganda is used as a tool to help shape images in the minds of human beings in support of an enterprise, idea or group. Propaganda can be used to substitute one social pattern for another.”

Walter Lippman, 1922, argued that visual images play an important role in agenda settings. Just look at Hitler, while he used his propaganda for evil, you have to commend the man and Leni Riefenstahl for gaining so much public support through their use of images and propaganda.  

There are two types of agenda setting. The first is in relation to what the public should focus on in relation to coverage, the media outlets decide this based on news values and the agenda they have behind them. The second type is about the media forming how people should think about the issues in the first level, by manipulating information and the way it’s presented.

So after all that discussion, what does agenda setting actually do?

It transfers issues of salience from the news media to the public

It transfers issues of salience for both issues and other objects, such as political figures

Elite media can often set the agenda for issues in the media through other outlets

This leads us onto the agenda setting family:

Media Gatekeeper – the media outlet which choose the issues and stories the public get to hear; how individuals control the flow of messages

Media Advocacy – the purposive promotion of a message through the media (e.g. health and smoking)

Agenda Cutting – The cutting of news stories which result in them getting less attention and being cared less about, such as AIDS in relation to Bieber and Gomez’s latest date

Agenda Surfing – This is the bandwagon effect, where everyone jumps on board to continue promoting stories which get attention

The Diffusion of News – The process through which an important event is communicated and released to the public, for example when it’s released (after it happened or is there a gap it’s held back from the media), where is it filmed or reported from and how it is released (all out press conference or just a PR statement)

Portrayal of the Issue – How the issue is shown and presented effects the public perception; the pictures, tone, language, exclusion and manipulation of the released information

Media Dependence – the more an individual uses it, the more susceptible that person is to the media’s agenda; with mobile access, we are becoming more dependant and on news and information despite the agenda behind it

There are of course, like any other theory, strengths and weaknesses to agenda setting theory. However, what interests me most is the emergence of the 24 hour news cycle as well as the online new media – it puts agenda setting into a whole new world!

With online news it’s all about getting the stories out there fast, why publish it after it’s already been read and discussed by the audiences – be the first to post it and you’re off to a good start. With the fast news cycles you have to wonder how news organisations can still engage in the high levels of agenda as with the traditional news, which consisted of an evening news broadcast and a daily newspaper (plenty of time to discuss daily agenda!). Nowadays, the news hot times online are first thing in the morning, lunch time and in the mid-afternoon slump.

Yet, agenda setting still has a huge impact on social perspectives. In the lecture we examined politics and agendas. The media has the ability (perhaps only the elite media and the resulting agenda surfing affect) to put different political issues on the agenda, even if the politicians don’t think it is! This was viewed in relation to the carbon tax/global warming. It seems to be one of the hot topics every week in the news, especially in relation to the struggle of passing the carbon tax. In comparison to the UK, which passed the a carbon tax, the run up to it had very little media coverage, and even on the day it was passed, it wasn’t anywhere near the top story. Evidently the agenda of UK media outlets does not extend to the semantics of a carbon tax like Australia.

With the continued commercialisation of media, it will be interesting to see how the news stories we see in the future are affected by the public, policy, corporate and media’s agenda.

“Agenda setting is not always the diabolical plan by journalists to control the minds of the public but an inadvertent by-product of the necessity to focus’ the news”(McCombs 2004)