How Social Media will end up choosing our next president.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Indecision 2012 - The Gingrich Who Stole South Carolina
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

           Link To the Daily Show

• The daily show portrayed Newt Gingrich as a cheating despicable man for leaving his first two wives who was battling cancer and MS in the second to be with his third and current wife. The Daily show uses this slant to paint a evil character of Newt. The show also discusses how ridiculous Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney are in their competition to receive the republican vote for presidency. 
• The show has been keeping and ongoing account of events leading up to the South Carolina primary but mostly its been about the "Definitely not coordinating with Stephen Colbert super pac"  and Steven Colbert attempt to enter the Republican primary. 

1. The Show uses other news programs such as Fox news as its source. it is not in conjunction with another news program but is with its own website.the audience will feel that Newt is a liar and a cheat and not feel confident giving him a vote for presidency.
2. the facts are correct and credible. the story varies drastically from one source to another. for instance Fox News thinks that Gingrich did well during the debate where as CNN might say that Mitt did better. the story is conveyed differently because all the news outlets are owned by different corporations with different agendas and some might attempt to push a more liberal view vs a more conservative view. 
3. the story is  multimedia, it is  on television with repeats on the internet with extended footage. it repeats eery morning and has a new show ever night.
4. i think citizen journalism is a good thing, however it can lead to the news being slanted or favorited. suppose a christian women reported about a new abortion clinic and in a negative connotation instead of a positive one.

CNN's website regarding the story.

• according to CNN Newt Gingrich deserved a lot of credit. Newt was down on the polls for most of the primaries and now that he has won South Carolina they feel the momentum of the Republican primary is shifting to favorite him as a front runner. this story is presented online in a news format. CNN.com is almost the same as LATIMES.com but the difference is that CNN has a few channels with videos and the website also has clips of shows on the site. 
• the story is ongoing however as the primary changes the story will change state per state. 

1. CNN is informing in this example and delivering an update to the S.C. primary story. it is not used in conjunction with another news source. and the audience might feel compelled to actually Vote for Newt where as in the daily show you might get another impression. 
2. everything printed was true. something might have been taken out of context though. such as Newt is a fighter...well he left both of his wives during a time of distress so if anything he is a coward and his ex wives are the fighters....this story varies dramatically depending on where you receive you information from.
3. the story is part of a ongoing news cycle. state to state the story might change, however in state the story can change just depending on what side you hear it from first. John Stewart might say Newt barely won the primary whereas CNN is saying he beat out the competition hugely and has a good chance of running for president. the story during the show might have different opinions from different host, however in the online article its just the view of one person who gave it from their point of view.
4. in this case citizen journalism is dangerous. because one person might feel compelled to help Newt Gingrich by any means necessary. this isnt a violation of any of my rights but it is a violation of favoritism. 

LaTimes website for the article

• the La times reported the outcome of the South Carolina republican primary. the story is reporting and basing it against the television stations. they are basing the victory of a series of negative campaign ads that both politicians are running against each other. 
• the story is party of a on going report covering the republican primaries leading up to the election of the next United States President. 

1. the paper uses television reports to credit their claims. it is in conjunction with some of the news station such ass Fox News or CNN. what is happening is that the newspaper is covering the primary and the perceived impact is that the audience will feel that Newt has the advantage in the polls. 
2. the News is one of the most credible sources of journalism. its reporters are held to a high standard to report the news with no bias. the story has been the same in facts from one platform to another because it really is a matter of opinion. the information is the same weather it is on television or a blog.  
3. the story is part of an ongoing coverage of the republican primaries. the story is longer online and there of course there is more space for the story for free, but there is no difference in the story. 

NBC's website to the story

• the story is about how the Colbert super pac is attempting to help fund the South Carolina primary.  due to the state almost running a deficit the primary debate was on hold until the super pac attempted to over the 500k. however the debate officials declined the offer from the comedian. NBC deiced to run and publish this story on its morning news show. they felt that this information is entertainment and decided to run this during the program than the news leading up to the convention such as the negative ads being run.

Blog

• this is a blog set up by CNN to let viewers  put their input in during the voting for the republican primaries and debate. 

1. twitter and facebook is used directly in this form. users can log on their account and enter their input. this form of social media is not used in conjunction with any other news source. CNN is merely the host however users can enter what ever they want and as long as it is not offensive it cannot be taken down. in my opinion the audience will believe what they want because the public is very critical of their peers.
2. this is the least reliable form although the blog does usually provide both sides of the story however the fact are not true and most of the time exaggerated. the story changes from post to post. 

4.  this is citizen journalism at its best. users can directly input their opinion on CNN.com. the audience is not as trusting when it is from another peer and not a professional journalist. also the people uploading their videos obviously will have a bias because they are not paid to stay neutral.