By Violet Smale

When perusing the morning paper or turning on the weather report, most Americans don’t think twice about the language in which they receive their news. In a country with no official national language, it is an underrated luxury to receive news in one’s native tongue.

María Marta Guzmán of WBIR in Knoxville, Tennessee, hopes to expand the market. Forty-two million Americans (roughly 12.5% of the total population) speak Spanish as their first language, according to Best Diplomats. An additional 15 million people speak Spanish as a second language. Yet, newsrooms have some catching up to do with these rapidly rising numbers.

Guzmán’s work towards a more inclusive newsroom began at DePaul University, where she founded the Spanish language newspaper La DePaulia in 2020.

“We started La DePaulia because we saw that there was a gap for bilingual coverage in Chicago, there weren’t as many platforms that offered English and Spanish stories. So, a lot of the time, our Spanish audience couldn’t read the news,” Guzmán said.

“Little by little we were able to find our own identity in the newspaper. We covered a lot of Latino-based stories. A lot of stories of what was happening in Little Village, and Pilsen, in Belmont Cragin. . .it was truly special because we were able to do stories of our own community,” said Guzmán.  “That’s also very powerful, because a lot of the times when you speak to someone that looks like you, that’s Latino, they tend to open up more, if they are sensitive to sharing a certain story, so you’re able to create that relationship.”

Now in her post-college career, getting a story picked up, says Guzmán, is the greatest challenge of all.

“You can pitch all these great stories and you know why they’re important. And you know why they deserve to be covered. A lot of the time, you need to convince your editor,” Guzmán said. “That takes a lot of pitching, convincing, and telling them why we should cover that story. And a lot of the time, they turn that down.”

Guzmán hopes those looking to break into the multilingual media market won’t be easily discouraged. Having the resilience to continue pitching your story, as well as the drive to pursue the story on your own, are Guzmán’s keys to success.

“If you don’t get the green light from your editors, you yourself are a platform. You can cover that story for your own platform…there’s so many platforms where you’re able to create your own brand and your own platform to tell your stories. If that’s a website, if that’s on Instagram, if that’s on Twitter…so, if you get the ‘no,’ then I would say go through yourself and do that story.”

There is power in bilingual reporting, Guzmán says. She continues her bilingual coverage in Knoxville, where she advocates for Tennessee’s growing Latino population.

“There’s a lot of Latinos in the South, a lot of immigrants in the South. It’s often not talked about, it’s kind of the silent unknown, but it’s huge.” Guzmán said. “If we were to cover bilingual stories, you’re getting stories from two different communities. You’re reaching an audience with two different backgrounds. And so, you’re having a much greater impact, and you’re reaching a much greater crowd.”

Guzmán hopes to see a more diverse industry in the future. A vested interest in multilingual communities could change the news industry for the better by serving a greater population.

“As an industry, we need to do a checkup and think about how we’re investing our resources. A lot of the time, the bilingual coverage is the afterthought. It’s sad because there’s a lot of power in bilingual reporting. If only people were able to see how powerful it could be to a station, because you’re opening up so many doors.”

-30-

by Cary Robbins

Mary Schmich can remember the first time her morals were put to the test.

Working for a paper in Palo Alto, California, at the beginning of her career, Schmich wrote a story about a young boy who died after falling from a cliff during a mudslide near San Francisco.

As she entered his memorial service, she was moved by how many people came together to celebrate his life. Wanting to capture the sorrowful moment, she decided to include a very personal detail: how his mother’s mascara was running down her face.

When the article was published, a reader sent a letter to the editor, asking how dare Schmich walk into that moment of grief and describe the boy’s mother in such a way.  “I was very defensive,” Schmich said. “That’s a telling detail.”

Now, decades later, Schmich who previously worked for The Chicago Tribune and other publications for decades, said when she first started reporting, she “didn’t even have a really good sense of what the ethical issues were.”

“I didn’t understand clearly for a while that…you’re giving them something by telling their story, but you’re taking something from them as well,” Schmich said.

Throughout their careers, journalists will at some point be faced with a task of writing stories about tragedy.

The Society of Professional Journalists published a resource guide for reporters to use when writing about survivors or grief. However, it is hard for journalists to understand where to draw the lines of reporting those personal stories until they are faced first-hand with the task of writing it themselves.

Schmich said now she understands that while the child’s memorial service was a public event, some moments are personal and do not need to be shared.

“If it’s going to hurt someone pointlessly, why are you doing it?” Schmich said.

Throughout her time reporting, Schmich learned that descriptions of people can sometimes be harmful. She said she often had to ask herself, “Are you pointlessly embarrassing someone? Are you playing into stereotypes?”

“I think a lot of physical description plays into stereotypes,” Schmich said.

Over 40 percent of Black adults said news “coverage largely stereotypes Black people,” according to a 2023 Pew Research Center study.

Some descriptions, Schmich said, do not make or break a story. Towards the end of her career, Schmich learned that sometimes describing people was not fully accurate.

“You do want some physical description sometimes,” Schmich said. “So, what I do now is I ask people how they would describe themselves.”

Above all, journalists have to continue trying to learn, she said. Journalists learn throughout their lives how to be respectful when sharing others’ stories.

“Whatever you just wrote is not everything. Whatever you just learned is just a piece of the puzzle….just stay curious, stay pure,” Schmich said. “But you also gotta meet that deadline.”

-30-

By Anna Retzlaff

“I never would have guessed in a million years … that I would be called an enemy of the people.”

For over 40 years, photo and broadcast journalist David Dellaria has been behind the camera on shows most households know well, like “60 Minutes” and “COPS”. Though these shows have remained consistent, the world around them is has significantly changed.

Dellaria remembers what it was like when he was first starting out. “There was something called ‘journalistic integrity’, and you couldn’t lie about what you said.” With the internet providing seemingly endless news platforms and sources, Dellaria says no one knows or trusts the source of information anymore. When there were only a few channels on cable, things were much different.

Dellaria earned a broadcast degree from San Jose State University and started at a local Bay Area newspaper. “It was like starting a marathon every day,” he said. Dellaria would spend his workday running in and out of the darkroom, eating lunch at the typewriter as the film developed. Later, a whole day’s work of constant rushing and delicate film handling would all go towards a minute-long segment for the five o’clock news.

Still, a small mistake could ruin the product of those tedious steps. If the projector was not working well, “then your entire story never aired, and they’d say, ‘Oh, well. We had some technical difficulties,’” Dellaria said.

Now, creators can take digital videos with fewer steps. “Some producers will just roll the whole camera for four hours,” then find the usable parts later. Dellaria remembers when all they had was 150 feet of film—enough for four minutes, not hours. The time and resource challenge created a need for packed, efficient interviews. Dellaria found that these bygone challenges were valuable to him. “I know for a fact that made me a much better cameraman,” Dellaria said.

Now, it is simpler and more universal than ever to create and share video work. A smartphone owner could take, edit, and share video faster and with more room for error than producing a film reel. “That’s a means to put out a story, but the problem is: what’s the source? It’s up to you to decide what to make of it,” said Dellaria. He believes this is the biggest downside to the modernization of video production. Though, Dellaria also sees good potential in making it universally possible for people to deliver information.

Regardless, the treatment and perception of journalists have changed across quite a few fronts. Camera operators used to have more freedom to film what they wanted. In Dellaria’s experience, institutions prioritize protecting their curated image over anything else. What journalists can film is now more restricted than it used to be for Dellaria.

“They don’t care if you’re ‘60 Minutes’ or the local, you know, NBC station. They’re going to make sure you don’t come anywhere near their property and don’t film anything that they don’t control,” Dellaria said. “Everybody has figured out they want to protect their image.”

Quite aware of what has changed, Dellaria is not sure what the future of journalism will look like. He finds it “unfathomable” that people have made enemies of the free press in America. Seeing journalists in a place that he finds hard to believe, he does not feel like he can predict which direction the industry is going.

Dellaria, having experienced so many changes over the course of his career, wonders along with the people who ask him what the future of journalism will look like. He wants to remain positive. “I know that there are young people capable of doing all of these jobs and more,” Dellaria said.

It seems no one can give journalists the comfort of a predictable future. However, those about to enter the field may find comfort in hearing what those before us have braved through. There are unknown struggles rising journalists will go through, yes. But, if we look at stories like Dave Dellaria’s, we can clearly see we will not be the first ones to survive going through major change.

(At least we will never have to deal with typewriters or developing film. I think we can do it.)

By Adit Jaganathan

Jim Litke, who has more sports coverage under his belt than your favorite team has wins, witnessed the evolution of the journalism industry firsthand. But the internet and social media have made him want to stop.

“I’ll be honest. I’m glad I’m not doing it. I think it’s a much different game and I think it’s a young man’s game, in that regard. You have to do way more and I think there’s way less engagement on the receiving end. I don’t think people read,” he said.

Litke started working for the Associated Press in 1978 and was around for the advent of social media. He always had his doubts about its use in the sports journalism industry. “I thought it was going to be really bad at the beginning. I was more convinced of it than ever. Just in a social sense. The media part of it is actually phenomenal. The idea that you can communicate in real time and with your audience is unbelievable. You would kill for that. We had to send out a newspaper and wait to see it the next morning in a tangible form. I think it’s impacted more by the social side of it.”

Litke believes the focus has shifted from in-depth reporting to sensationalism and engagement. The emphasis on creating viral content has overshadowed the essence of journalism. Journalists are almost encouraged to provoke reactions on social media rather than deliver nuanced and well researched stories. The genuine interest in sports has died down due to the amount of information that is immediately accessible to fans.

Social media has also had an impact on how journalists research a story. Writers seem afraid to go against the general consensus and allow it to influence their stories. A lot of writers don’t even watch games before writing a story, opting just to find highlights online and scour social media to find out what happened in a game.

Litke explained, “We’ve crowd sourced opinions. So, it used to be, there was almost eighty percent news and twenty percent opinion. Now, it’s completely flipped.” He continued, “You know when people go, ‘Oh, I read some research. I’m not going to get the vaccine.’ Well, you’re a truck driver. You’re not a doctor. The guy that was recommending it to you went to medical school. He’s got degrees. And yet people feel like they know something because thirty other idiots said something. So, it’s dangerous to crowd source not just information, but we’ve crowd sourced opinion.”

However, the internet isn’t the only reason why sports journalism has lost the essence of reporting. Sports teams have restricted journalists’ access to the athletes and are tailoring the stories that are put out into the media. The days where a reporter could have a one-on-one conversation with an athlete before a game are long gone. Nowadays, you’d be lucky to catch an athlete without a PR official within ten feet of them. This could be the reason why people turn to social media for help.

The internet has forced the sports journalism industry to adapt, but that hasn’t necessarily benefitted the industry as a whole.

By Lilly Keller

This morning, like every morning, I reflexively checked X after my alarm buzzed me awake. The initial tweet, its details still blurred by the remnants of sleep, broke the startling news that Vice Media would cease publication on Vice.com, leading to the layoffs of hundreds of employees.

However, Vice and its journalists are just the latest victims in a year marked by widespread newsroom layoffs. In January, the Los Angeles Times slashed 20% of its newsroom, The Messenger, a news startup, shut down entirely in early February, leaving over 300 employees jobless and recently, Time laid off 15% of its staff, roughly 30 employees.

As a young journalist entering the industry, I find that the recurring layoffs create a sense of insecurity and uncertainty. While no career is immune to spontaneous downsizing, journalism attracts this prospect like a moth to a flame.

According to Axios, the recent layoffs in the news industry stem from decreased advertisement revenue, consolidation-related debt and subscription fatigue.

While these reasons are largely out of individual journalist’s control, it offers little comfort.

Julie Bosman, the Chicago bureau chief for The New York Times, has observed the impact of layoffs on journalists at all levels throughout her career in national news.

Growing up in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Bosman remembered her local paper, the Kenosha News, as small but robust, with dozens of reporters consistently covering everything from high school sports to local government and human interest stories. However, when she returned to her hometown in 2021 to cover the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, who fatally shot two people during a period of civil unrest, she described the paper as a shell of its former self.

“It was a great example of local news,” Bosman said. “It was so striking to see up close the difference in how many reporters were working there…I think you can probably count on one hand the full-time reporters who worked there at the time.”

The harsh reality is that the Kenosha News is a single piece of a larger puzzle, illustrating a widespread trend of layoffs and downsizing in local news nationwide.

Having harbored a passion for local news since before college, I’m grappling not only with the uncertainty of my professional future but also with the broader implications for our democracy.

A recent Knight Foundation poll revealed that 60% of Americans trust local news over national news for information applicable to their daily lives. Additionally, nearly 78% express greater trust in local news for information necessary to engage with their community.

As newsrooms, whether local or national, shrink, the societal cost increases. A functioning democracy relies on accurate, trustworthy information for informed voting. Gaps in news coverage create cracks, fostering the spread of fake news and misinformation.

Bosman emphasized that downsizing not only lowers the quality of reporting but also robs reporters of valuable learning opportunities from their colleagues.

“I know that when you’re around more people, when you have more colleagues who are at all stages of their careers that really helps you understand how to do your job. At The Times there are there are journalists who’ve been reporters for 30 years who have covered everything from, you know, metro to style to national news, sports and have just amassed a wealth of knowledge that they can then share within the newsroom,” Bosman said.

However, remaining in a constant state of anxiety over an unknown future will not change anything. For Bosman, the best approach is to focus on what can be controlled within the industry rather than fixating on factors beyond one’s reach.

“Well, one piece of advice that I was given by one of my mentors was, if you feel like you’re stuck and you’re not sure if you’re going in the right direction on something… and if you if you’re getting a little overwhelmed with like the direction of your career or the direction of the news industry, just go one story at a time and that will be a way out,” Bosman said.

Despite the current instability in journalism, my desire to pursue this career path remains steadfast. I recognize that even in the industry’s most uncertain moments, journalists are indispensable for a more just future. Society will always need journalists, whether acknowledged or not. As long as we maintain our passion for accountability and democracy, we will always have a purpose, regardless of where or how long we end up.

By Max Rayman

Turn on a sports network and more than likely it will be some type of debate format. ESPN’s First Take, which started to embrace that system in 2012, has become the poster child.

Now, most sports shows have the host in some capacity yelling at their co-host or the listeners for dramatic effect. Entertainment and sensationalism have started to take precedence over analysis and statistics, with more and more sports shows following suit.

Longtime CBS sports broadcaster Greg Gumbel was vocal in his disapproval of how sensationalism has taken over sports media.

“First of all, it’s not journalism. It’s sensational by all means,” Gumbel said. “It seems that someone in the genre comes up with something off the wall to say every day. After a while, you tend to realize that’s the point. The point is to be surprising and amazing and something you’ve never heard before. Then 24 hours later they take the complete opposite approach.”

Despite his displeasure with how the sports media landscape has begun to embrace sensationalism, viewership continues to increase for these programs. According to the Sports Business Journal, in December of 2023, First Take averaged 611,000 viewers, which was a 24% increase from the prior year.

Not to be outdone by their rival network, Fox Sports (FS1) posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, that three of their shows all had record months in December of 2023. Both The Herd and First Things First recorded their most-watched month ever, while Speak had its second most-watched month ever.

But what exactly about these programs, is leading to viewers continuously tuning in? Why are spectators allowing sensationalism to take over the sports media landscape?

Gumbel is also baffled at how invested viewers have become.

“What is with the people who are listening in who feel that they are learning something?” Gumbel said. “That this is something they need to have and want to track and follow.”

Recently, during the 2024 NBA All-Star Weekend, the All-Star game was under heavy scrutiny due to a lack of effort from the player’s side. For the first time in NBA All-Star history, a team recorded over 200 points in the game. Stephen A. Smith, the host of ESPN’s First Take, on his show, called the lack of defense a “travesty”. Other sports hosts repeatedly agreed that the event was borderline unfixable, and few offered possible solutions.

Once again, sensationalism was present, which wasn’t necessary – but that has been the issue. How do sports hosts toe the line between being entertaining and not at the expense of compromising accuracy? Gumbel wasn’t sure if that was possible.

“Who’s toeing the line?”, Gumbel asked. “I don’t think hosts care if they are toeing the line or not. That means you would lean on their superiors to know if they are toeing the line or not and you know what, if they are getting ratings they don’t care if they are toeing the line. They are doing what they are supposed to do. It’s this wicked circle that comes back around looking for what you’re trying to accomplish. If that’s what you’re trying to accomplish and you know that’s what they’re trying to accomplish, then whose got room to argue?”

Sensationalism is growing and continuing to sneak its way into sports media, and sadly for now, there is no possible solution on the horizon.

-30-