Posts tagged with ‘newsrooms’

Imagined Conversations: NFL & Access Journalism Edition

In which we pull together different voices talking about the relationship between reporter and sources, and discover there’s a grudging admiration for the oft-maligned TMZ.

Brian Stelter: Any time the NFL is the story, the networks’ coverage of the story is very closely watched, because ESPN, CBS, NBC, and FOX all have multi-billion-dollar contracts to carry NFL games. Their news divisions have to cover the news, but their parent companies have to protect their investments in football.

Stefan Fatsis: [I]t’s no surprise that NFL-owned media would tiptoe around stories questioning the integrity and credibility of the NFL. The [Ray] Rice case is a reminder of how the nearly $10 billion-a-year NFL’s rise to cultural prominence has allowed it to shape the message transmitted to fans, both through its quasi-journalistic arms and through multibillion-dollar deals with other media.

Kelly McBride: [But] this is a much different story than if the Super Dome was ready for the Super Bowl or even if the NFL is ignoring the data on concussions… This is a story about the culture of the NFL. It’s hard for journalists because they are a part of the NFL culture.

Margaret Sullivan: In some ways, this is the eternal problem of the beat reporter (or specialized writer or critic): When you cover a subject for many years, familiarity can turn into friendship.

Michael Hiltzik: To a certain extent, journalists have always been at risk of becoming “captured” by their sources, or their subjects; it takes a high degree of professional discipline to fight the magnetic tug, and the best journalists make their careers that way. But the closer one is to the center of power, the less inclined one might be to write a report that will get one bounced from the inner circle.

Stefan Fatsis: [B]y hiring veteran reporters at their proprietary websites and cable networks — at higher salaries than those paid by the newspapers and magazines where the reporters formerly worked — the NFL and other pro sports leagues have managed to reduce the amount of critical daily reporting and commentary. That might not be the direct intention, but it’s the result.

Dave McKenna: The chosen few disseminators of football intelligence are multimedia stars today, with gigs in print and online and on TV and radio, and with huge Twitter presences… The NFL need only filter the message of a very few folks to shape the entire national discussion.

Stefan Fatsis: Like Wall Street and other big institutions, the NFL prefers and… facilitates access reporting. It’s good business. The steady flow of information on the ESPN ticker keeps NFL fans engaged with the product and wanting more of it. As far as accountability journalism is concerned, it seems like no coincidence that the Rice story broke thanks to the gatecrashers at TMZ — a bunch of outsiders who have much to gain from knocking pro football down a peg, and are willing to write checks to buy up the sort of photos and videos that tarnish the NFL’s vaunted shield.

Michael Hiltzik: The sports leagues and companies that set up their own news outlets pretend that their only goal is to provide useful information to fans, customers or members of the public who can no longer get it from a fragmented news industry. That’s a scam; powerful entities have always resented having their public statements filtered by skeptical intermediaries in the press — or worse, having their secrets exposed.

David Zurawik: TMZ did the job the mainstream sports media failed to do in showing us the ugliness of this incident.

Amanda Hess: What makes TMZ so effective? Unlike prosecutors (who hedge their bets to ensure they only prosecute people who juries will convict) and league officials (who are invested in selling athletes as heroes), TMZ has an economic imperative to administer uncompromising takedowns. And unlike traditional journalistic outlets, it’s willing to pay for tips, tapes, and documents to back them up.

Mark Mravic: [TMZ] is applying to sports the hardcore tabloid-type approach that has worked so well for them when they are covering celebrities. And there really hasn’t been an outlet that’s been doing that in sports. It shows what can be done when you can actually start digging around and you’re willing to pay a lot of money for things — if that’s exactly how TMZ is getting these clips.

Michael Hiltzik: That’s why outsiders are often responsible for the biggest news breaks. Watergate was initially exposed not by members of the White House press corps, but by a couple of police reporters named Woodward and Bernstein. The Ray Rice video wasn’t acquired and aired by members of the NFL press corps, but by the scandal-mongering upstart TMZ.

Stefan Fatsis: It’s also fair to say, though, that the Rice video has changed how Roger Goodell’s NFL will be covered going forward. The league’s media lapdogs have started barking, and they might not stop until the commissioner is gone.

If You Suddenly Find Yourself Covering Gender-Based Violence
Ray Rice’s assault on his wife put domestic violence front and center of the news where it’s being covered by many who have no experience reporting on the issue.
Enter WITNESS’ guide for conducting interviews with survivors of gender-based violence. It’s an important resource for those thinking of interviewing survivors about the issue, or reporting on gender-based violence more deeply.
Via the Dart Center for Journalism & Trauma:

The Guide to Interviewing Survivors of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence is an illustrated how-to resource for documenting the stories of survivors of sexual and gender-based violence safely, effectively and ethically.
Designed for human rights activists, advocates, citizen journalists and filmmakers, the guide covers prep and planning for conducting and sharing interviews, and helps navigate the terrain of social stigma and shame, threats of retribution by perpetrators and/or institutions that may wish to bury the story and the imperative to ensure the emotional and physical safety of interview subjects.

The guide can be downloaded here. A companion video series can be viewed here.
Image: Cover detail, via WITNESS.

If You Suddenly Find Yourself Covering Gender-Based Violence

Ray Rice’s assault on his wife put domestic violence front and center of the news where it’s being covered by many who have no experience reporting on the issue.

Enter WITNESS’ guide for conducting interviews with survivors of gender-based violence. It’s an important resource for those thinking of interviewing survivors about the issue, or reporting on gender-based violence more deeply.

Via the Dart Center for Journalism & Trauma:

The Guide to Interviewing Survivors of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence is an illustrated how-to resource for documenting the stories of survivors of sexual and gender-based violence safely, effectively and ethically.

Designed for human rights activists, advocates, citizen journalists and filmmakers, the guide covers prep and planning for conducting and sharing interviews, and helps navigate the terrain of social stigma and shame, threats of retribution by perpetrators and/or institutions that may wish to bury the story and the imperative to ensure the emotional and physical safety of interview subjects.

The guide can be downloaded here. A companion video series can be viewed here.

Image: Cover detail, via WITNESS.

Manatee Fair
Via @darth on #RuinAMagazine.

Manatee Fair

Via @darth on #RuinAMagazine.

If we are all journalists now, what happens to the privileges journalists used to claim? →

Via Index on Censorship:

We are used to telling ourselves by now that journalism is a manifestation of a human right — that of free expression. Smartphones, cheap recording equipment, and free access to social media and blogging platforms have revolutionised journalism; the means of production have fallen into the hands of the many.

This is a good thing. The more information we have on events, surely the better. But one question does arise: if we are all journalists now, what happens to the privileges journalists used to claim?

Official press identification in the UK states that the holder is recognised by police as a “bona fide newsgatherer”. As statements of status go, it seems a paltry thing. But it does imply that some exception must be made for the bearer. The recognised journalist, it is suggested, should be free to roam a scene unmolested. One can ask questions and reasonably expect an answer. One can wield a video or audio device and not have it confiscated. One can talk to whoever one wants, without fear of recrimination.

That, at least, is the theory. But in Britain, the US and elsewhere, the practice has been changing. Whether during periods of unrest or after, police have shown a disregard for the integrity of journalists’ work. The actions of police in Ferguson have merely been part of a pattern.

FJP: As of August 22, 17 reporters had been arrested in Ferguson. 

Jon Stewart on (Fox) News Coverage of Ferguson
We have never been prouder of our son Jim. He gave his life trying to expose the world to the suffering of the Syrian people.

We implore the kidnappers to spare the lives of the remaining hostages. Like Jim, they are innocents. They have no control over American government policy in Iraq, Syria or anywhere in the world.

We thank Jim for all the joy he gave us. He was an extraordinary son, brother, journalist and person. Please respect our privacy in the days ahead as we mourn and cherish Jim.

A message from Diane Foley whose son Jim was executed by the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Via Facebook.

Foley was originally kidnapped in Syria in November 2012 while covering that conflict for Global Post. 

Related

Foreign Policy: Social Media Companies Scramble to Block Terrorist Video of Journalist’s Murder
The crackdown provided a vivid example of the pressure on social media companies to police violent terrorist propaganda, but at the same time it showed the difficulty they have in stopping individuals intent on spreading violent images and rhetoric.

Washington Post: Foley video, photos being scrubbed from Twitter
[T]he very viral abundance that makes Twitter so powerful — a half billion tweets are sent a day — makes it difficult to police.

Dick Costolo, CEO of Twitter.

See also #ISISmediaBlackout on the power and propaganda of imagery.

Independent and Citizen Journalism in #Ferguson
Via GigaOm: Crowd-powered journalism becomes crucial when traditional media is unwilling or unable:

Just as it did in Egypt and Ukraine, the stream of updates from Ferguson — both from amateur or non-journalists, eyewitnesses and professional reporters for various outlets — turned into a feed of breaking news unlike anything that non-Twitter users were getting from the major news networks and cable channels. Most of the latter continued with their regular programming, just as media outlets in Turkey and Ukraine avoided mentioning the growing demonstrations in their cities. In a very real sense, citizen-powered journalism filled the gap left by traditional media, which were either incapable or unwilling to cover the news.

Related, also via GigaOm: You can use your phone to film the police, even if they tell you not to.
Related, once again: Argus Radio was webcasting events last night from Ferguson via their Livestream channel and will start again today at 3pm.
Image: Screenshot from Argus Radio’s “I Am Mike Brown” Livestream channel.

Independent and Citizen Journalism in #Ferguson

Via GigaOm: Crowd-powered journalism becomes crucial when traditional media is unwilling or unable:

Just as it did in Egypt and Ukraine, the stream of updates from Ferguson — both from amateur or non-journalists, eyewitnesses and professional reporters for various outlets — turned into a feed of breaking news unlike anything that non-Twitter users were getting from the major news networks and cable channels. Most of the latter continued with their regular programming, just as media outlets in Turkey and Ukraine avoided mentioning the growing demonstrations in their cities. In a very real sense, citizen-powered journalism filled the gap left by traditional media, which were either incapable or unwilling to cover the news.

Related, also via GigaOm: You can use your phone to film the police, even if they tell you not to.

Related, once again: Argus Radio was webcasting events last night from Ferguson via their Livestream channel and will start again today at 3pm.

Image: Screenshot from Argus Radio’s “I Am Mike Brown” Livestream channel.

In the last decade, newspapers’ weekday circulation has fallen 47 percent, ads have fallen 55 percent, and about seven in ten newspaper readers are now older than 45. Stats like these provide the background music to events of the last few months, when News Corp, Time Warner, Gannett, the Tribune Company, and E. W. Scripps all unloaded their journalism divisions. Including the Washington Post’s sale within the last 12 months, this means that seven of the ten largest newspapers in the country have been dumped in an annus horribilis for print.

A Terrible Year for Newspapers, a Good Year for News - The Atlantic (via infoneer-pulse)

FJP: Horrendum X Annos. But, yes, also an amazing age for news.

(via infoneer-pulse)

Business News, August 2014 Edition
Buzzfeed, which gets about 150 million of us to visit each month, just closed a $50 million round with Andreessen Horowitz, the prominent technology venture firm.
Chris Dixon, general partner at the VC firm, says Buzzfeed is a “full stack" startup, meaning that it’s not just an online publisher, but rather an online publisher with integrated end-to-end technologies.
In this case, a media stack on which listicles and in-depth reporting can co-exist side by side, driven by a modern content management system, integrated analytics and ad serving engines, and a 75 person team creating “native content” for advertisers. It’s repetitive to say Buzzfeed also gets the social thing. About 75% of Buzzfeed’s traffic comes from social media.
What, fundamentally, makes this an interesting investment to Dixon? A mastery of social, mobile, content and tech:

Many of today’s great media companies were built on top of emerging technologies. Examples include Time Inc. which was built on color printing, CBS which was built on radio, and Viacom which was built on cable TV. We’re presently in the midst of a major technological shift in which, increasingly, news and entertainment are being distributed on social networks and consumed on mobile devices. We believe BuzzFeed will emerge from this period as a preeminent media company.

Meantime, legacy media companies are dropping their print publications. “Divestiture" is the name of the 2014 game. Three companies built on print — Ganett, the Tribune Company, and EW Scripps — are focusing on television, radio and the Internet, and spinning off their print properties to survive as independent companies that sink or swim as the tides may turn.
Says The New York Times’ David Carr:

The persistent financial demands of Wall Street have trumped the informational needs of Main Street. For decades, investors wanted newspaper companies to become bigger and diversify, so they bought more newspapers and developed television divisions. Now print is too much of a drag on earnings, so media companies are dividing back up and print is being kicked to the curb.

The news behind the news, of course, is that already reeling smaller, regional papers will increasingly vanish without the financial buffer provided by being part of larger diversified companies. This, despite the fact that 72% of Americans follow local news via these same print publications. Then again, many outside the news media bubble don’t know about the financial disruption that’s churned the industry over the last decade.
Via last year’s Pew State of the Media Report:

[T]he majority of people surveyed early this year had heard little or nothing about the financial problems besetting news organizations. The largest group of respondents—36%—said they heard “nothing at all” about the issue and the second largest—24%—said they heard “a little.”

So where goes print?
As news of the $50 million Buzzfeed round pinged about the Internet, a quieter profile of Harper’s publisher John MacArthur hit the Web. In it, he doubles down on print:

The web is bad for writers, [MacArthur] said, who are too exhausted by the pace of an endless news cycle to write poised, reflective stories and who are paid peanuts if they do. It’s bad for publishers, who have lost advertising revenue to Google and Facebook and will never make enough from a free model to sustain great writing. And it’s bad for readers, who cannot absorb information well on devices that buzz, flash and generally distract.
He does not want to explore many of the new revenue streams favored by other publishers — like Monocle, which has stores and a radio station. He will not let advertisers sponsor a section of the magazine, let alone place native ads, for fear that it will look as if they own Harper’s. He does not want conferences or to make videos. “A magazine should be a magazine,” he said. “A newspaper should be a newspaper.”

Harper’s, like other general interest literary magazines, consistently loses money. Then again, as a nonprofit backed by the MacArthur foundation and its $5.7 billion endowment, it’s not going away anytime soon.
For the rest: the forecast reads rocky times ahead.
Image: Old Carissa shipwrecked off the coast of Oregon, via Erin Misserion on Flickr. Select to embiggen.

Business News, August 2014 Edition

Buzzfeed, which gets about 150 million of us to visit each month, just closed a $50 million round with Andreessen Horowitz, the prominent technology venture firm.

Chris Dixon, general partner at the VC firm, says Buzzfeed is a “full stack" startup, meaning that it’s not just an online publisher, but rather an online publisher with integrated end-to-end technologies.

In this case, a media stack on which listicles and in-depth reporting can co-exist side by side, driven by a modern content management system, integrated analytics and ad serving engines, and a 75 person team creating “native content” for advertisers. It’s repetitive to say Buzzfeed also gets the social thing. About 75% of Buzzfeed’s traffic comes from social media.

What, fundamentally, makes this an interesting investment to Dixon? A mastery of social, mobile, content and tech:

Many of today’s great media companies were built on top of emerging technologies. Examples include Time Inc. which was built on color printing, CBS which was built on radio, and Viacom which was built on cable TV. We’re presently in the midst of a major technological shift in which, increasingly, news and entertainment are being distributed on social networks and consumed on mobile devices. We believe BuzzFeed will emerge from this period as a preeminent media company.

Meantime, legacy media companies are dropping their print publications. “Divestiture" is the name of the 2014 game. Three companies built on print — Ganett, the Tribune Company, and EW Scripps — are focusing on television, radio and the Internet, and spinning off their print properties to survive as independent companies that sink or swim as the tides may turn.

Says The New York Times’ David Carr:

The persistent financial demands of Wall Street have trumped the informational needs of Main Street. For decades, investors wanted newspaper companies to become bigger and diversify, so they bought more newspapers and developed television divisions. Now print is too much of a drag on earnings, so media companies are dividing back up and print is being kicked to the curb.

The news behind the news, of course, is that already reeling smaller, regional papers will increasingly vanish without the financial buffer provided by being part of larger diversified companies. This, despite the fact that 72% of Americans follow local news via these same print publications. Then again, many outside the news media bubble don’t know about the financial disruption that’s churned the industry over the last decade.

Via last year’s Pew State of the Media Report:

[T]he majority of people surveyed early this year had heard little or nothing about the financial problems besetting news organizations. The largest group of respondents—36%—said they heard “nothing at all” about the issue and the second largest—24%—said they heard “a little.”

So where goes print?

As news of the $50 million Buzzfeed round pinged about the Internet, a quieter profile of Harper’s publisher John MacArthur hit the Web. In it, he doubles down on print:

The web is bad for writers, [MacArthur] said, who are too exhausted by the pace of an endless news cycle to write poised, reflective stories and who are paid peanuts if they do. It’s bad for publishers, who have lost advertising revenue to Google and Facebook and will never make enough from a free model to sustain great writing. And it’s bad for readers, who cannot absorb information well on devices that buzz, flash and generally distract.

He does not want to explore many of the new revenue streams favored by other publishers — like Monocle, which has stores and a radio station. He will not let advertisers sponsor a section of the magazine, let alone place native ads, for fear that it will look as if they own Harper’s. He does not want conferences or to make videos. “A magazine should be a magazine,” he said. “A newspaper should be a newspaper.”

Harper’s, like other general interest literary magazines, consistently loses money. Then again, as a nonprofit backed by the MacArthur foundation and its $5.7 billion endowment, it’s not going away anytime soon.

For the rest: the forecast reads rocky times ahead.

Image: Old Carissa shipwrecked off the coast of Oregon, via Erin Misserion on Flickr. Select to embiggen.

Report: US Surveillance Harming Journalism, Law and Society
Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union released a report this week outlining the effect the US surveillance state is having on journalism, law and society. In particular, the two groups interviewed “50 journalists covering intelligence, national security, and law enforcement for outlets including the New York Times, the Associated Press, ABC, and NPR.”
Via Human Rights Watch:

[The report] documents how national security journalists and lawyers are adopting elaborate steps or otherwise modifying their practices to keep communications, sources, and other confidential information secure in light of revelations of unprecedented US government surveillance of electronic communications and transactions. The report finds that government surveillance and secrecy are undermining press freedom, the public’s right to information, and the right to counsel, all human rights essential to a healthy democracy…
…Surveillance has magnified existing concerns among journalists and their sources over the administration’s crackdown on leaks. The crackdown includes new restrictions on contact between intelligence officials and the media, an increase in leak prosecutions, and the Insider Threat Program, which requires federal officials to report one another for “suspicious” behavior that might betray an intention to leak information.
Journalists interviewed for the report said that surveillance intimidates sources, making them more hesitant to discuss even unclassified issues of public concern. The sources fear they could lose their security clearances, be fired, or – in the worst case – come under criminal investigation.
"People are increasingly scared to talk about anything," observed one Pulitzer Prize winner, including unclassified matters that are of legitimate public concern.

The report, With Liberty to Monitor All: How Large-Scale US Surveillance is Harming Journalism, Law, and American Democracy, can be downloaded here (PDF). The online Executive Summary is here.
Meantime, via The New York Times: “An internal investigation by the Central Intelligence Agency has found that its officers improperly penetrated a computer network used by the Senate Intelligence Committee in preparing its report on the C.I.A.’s detention and interrogation program.”
Image: Anonymous quote from a journalist interviewed for the report. Via Human Rights Watch.

Report: US Surveillance Harming Journalism, Law and Society

Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union released a report this week outlining the effect the US surveillance state is having on journalism, law and society. In particular, the two groups interviewed “50 journalists covering intelligence, national security, and law enforcement for outlets including the New York Times, the Associated Press, ABC, and NPR.”

Via Human Rights Watch:

[The report] documents how national security journalists and lawyers are adopting elaborate steps or otherwise modifying their practices to keep communications, sources, and other confidential information secure in light of revelations of unprecedented US government surveillance of electronic communications and transactions. The report finds that government surveillance and secrecy are undermining press freedom, the public’s right to information, and the right to counsel, all human rights essential to a healthy democracy…

…Surveillance has magnified existing concerns among journalists and their sources over the administration’s crackdown on leaks. The crackdown includes new restrictions on contact between intelligence officials and the media, an increase in leak prosecutions, and the Insider Threat Program, which requires federal officials to report one another for “suspicious” behavior that might betray an intention to leak information.

Journalists interviewed for the report said that surveillance intimidates sources, making them more hesitant to discuss even unclassified issues of public concern. The sources fear they could lose their security clearances, be fired, or – in the worst case – come under criminal investigation.

"People are increasingly scared to talk about anything," observed one Pulitzer Prize winner, including unclassified matters that are of legitimate public concern.

The report, With Liberty to Monitor All: How Large-Scale US Surveillance is Harming Journalism, Law, and American Democracy, can be downloaded here (PDF). The online Executive Summary is here.

Meantime, via The New York Times: “An internal investigation by the Central Intelligence Agency has found that its officers improperly penetrated a computer network used by the Senate Intelligence Committee in preparing its report on the C.I.A.’s detention and interrogation program.”

Image: Anonymous quote from a journalist interviewed for the report. Via Human Rights Watch.

[T]o be honest, there aren’t a lot of jobs that are cooler than being a reporter. I mean, that’s what Superman was.

— John Horton, former columnist for The Plain Dealer, to Poynter, before adding, “I miss the daily challenge that you had, the feeling that you were doing something larger that made a big difference, fighting that fight every day. I think journalism is one of the few jobs that really has that aspect to it.” How mass layoffs in 2013 changed the lives of former Plain Dealer staffers.

On this, the 100th anniversary of the day the first world war began, it is sobering to look back at the way that conflict was so badly reported. The catalogue of journalistic misdeeds is a matter of record: the willingness to publish propaganda as fact, the apparently tame acceptance of censorship and the failure to hold power to account.

Roy Greenslade, The Guardian. First world war: how state and press kept truth off the front page.

FJP: The more things change…

Wanted: One Qualified Lebron Stalker
The Northeast Ohio Media Group has a “Lebron James Beat.” Here’s its job listing:

Bring your sports, news and investigative reporting experience to one of the most challenging reporting jobs in the country, covering the sports performance, business dealings and community leadership of basketball star LeBron James. You’ll cover all aspects of his roles in Northeast Ohio and nationally as he returns to the Cleveland Cavaliers, writing, creating videos, and posting across multiple platforms including all relevant types of social media. You’ll also participate in broadcasts where you discuss James, working closely with reporters assigned to cover the Cavaliers and the NBA.

Image: Lebron James GIF via cagrialkan.

Wanted: One Qualified Lebron Stalker

The Northeast Ohio Media Group has a “Lebron James Beat.” Here’s its job listing:

Bring your sports, news and investigative reporting experience to one of the most challenging reporting jobs in the country, covering the sports performance, business dealings and community leadership of basketball star LeBron James. You’ll cover all aspects of his roles in Northeast Ohio and nationally as he returns to the Cleveland Cavaliers, writing, creating videos, and posting across multiple platforms including all relevant types of social media. You’ll also participate in broadcasts where you discuss James, working closely with reporters assigned to cover the Cavaliers and the NBA.

Image: Lebron James GIF via cagrialkan.

Al Jazeera’s Looking for Six Global Fellows
Al Jazeera’s AJ+ is launching this fall. With it, they’re hiring six global fellows. Some basic details:

We’re on the hunt for six seriously stellar young people from around the globe to make up our first class of AJ+ Fellows.
It’s a one-year gig, it’s paid, and it’s an opportunity unlike anything else, an opportunity to be at the heart of the next generation of storytellers. Throughout the year, you’ll work with and learn from our core AJ+ team. You’ll join us in our adventure as we introduce AJ+ to the world, and you’ll be a valuable part of making sure this introduction unfolds with fireworks.

The fellowship begins with a 2-3 week stint in San Francisco before heading back to your home region.
Major Qualification: You “have to be downright obsessed with the news and trends in your region and — just as importantly — with the pursuit of unearthing untold stories.”
Deadline to Apply: August 1. Details and application here.

Al Jazeera’s Looking for Six Global Fellows

Al Jazeera’s AJ+ is launching this fall. With it, they’re hiring six global fellows. Some basic details:

We’re on the hunt for six seriously stellar young people from around the globe to make up our first class of AJ+ Fellows.

It’s a one-year gig, it’s paid, and it’s an opportunity unlike anything else, an opportunity to be at the heart of the next generation of storytellers. Throughout the year, you’ll work with and learn from our core AJ+ team. You’ll join us in our adventure as we introduce AJ+ to the world, and you’ll be a valuable part of making sure this introduction unfolds with fireworks.

The fellowship begins with a 2-3 week stint in San Francisco before heading back to your home region.

Major Qualification: You “have to be downright obsessed with the news and trends in your region and — just as importantly — with the pursuit of unearthing untold stories.”

Deadline to Apply: August 1. Details and application here.