You may have gotten word on this, but as a student there and journalism major, I want to know your opinions.
The headline: HPV grabs you by the throat
The picture: A young woman in just bra and panties sitting on a desk, legs spread wide open - and a young man eagerly kneeled in front of her, head caught in between.
http://www.unfspinnaker.com/printeditions/34/34-28.pdf (http://www.unfspinnaker.com/printeditions/34/34-28.pdf)
(Story's on pg. 5)
First Coast News got word and reported on Monday night's 11 o'clock news. Action News Jax is currently airing a piece now. And it's even made for discussion on online paper The Huffington Post.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/article/198423/3/Update-UNF-Paper-Accts-Frozen-After-Cover-Depicting-Oral-Sex (http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/article/198423/3/Update-UNF-Paper-Accts-Frozen-After-Cover-Depicting-Oral-Sex)
The editor-in-chief and the staff are standing by their decision, calling the story with the image "necessary". You can read the piece - it's supposedly about the link between oral sex and throat cancer. Unfortunately, it reads pretty sketchy; it's really about the link between HPV in women and the risk of men developing throat cancer after performing oral sex on a woman infected.
Now I agree that the topic of the "story" is important and everyone should be aware of a possible health risk. However, the staff are blindly - or purposely out of shame - ignoring the main issue for argument: the cover. How dare they call the mumbled generic quote from an editor with no visual nor auditory poise an explanation? The cover and article circled around women like a wolf-pack. In how many more ways can we turn women into merely bodies? Is it a coincidence that women face the brunt of HPV and the girl is scantily clad while the boy is in full dress? Are you saying that women who dress in such a manner are "asking for it"? Or more so are the type of women who have HPV? God forbid we feel empowered in our own skin or make like normal and wear underwear. Or have an intimate, physical relationship. As if women and young girls weren't already insecure enough about their bodies. Men already quick enough to jump for the take and skip the give.
You want people to care about the story? Any woman or man or couple, especially college-aged, is more than likely aware of what HPV is and has themselves or know's someone who has dealt with HPV personally, seeing as it's so common that "about half of all men and more than 3 out of 4 women have HPV at some point in their lives." This cover is shameful and pays no mind to its target audience. I'm all about pushing the hot topic envelope and word play, but we're not talking about the writing, we're talking about the picture.
Where do we draw the line with ethical journalism and responsible reporting? Would this have gotten different feedback had it been ran by say, The T-U? Can a university newspaper go so unsupervised and run rampant making their own decisions? I am uneasy knowing these kids may be the next news leaders in our community.
Also, I'd like to point out that the piece was written by a male, the editor is a male, and the staff has about 16 males to 6 females. Just saying...
This is obviously an important topic to you. I think if you step back, it's nothing more than what happens in news rooms every single day. I wasn't shocked by the cover. I don't think it's demeaning to anyone. And if the women on the staff - are you one of them? - were put off by it, why haven't they walked out and let us know it?
But back to my point - this is the way the news business works nowadays. Specifically about the cover, "if it bleeds, it leads." That's what the cover was about. It was screaming "pick me up!" If some people did, and decide to get the HPV vaccine, all the better.
It's up to every person to decide if it's responsible journalism, or not. As an alumni of UNF (and a lawyer who's pretty in-favor of the 1st amendment), I think it was within bounds.
Just my $.02.
First... Welcome Sarah. Your main point seems to be...
QuoteThis cover is shameful and pays no mind to its target audience.
I will not judge the shameful part... but it most certainly does pay mind to the target audience. The picture would likely not make on to the front page of a "mainstream" newspaper. It is a college campus newspaper. I would imagine "shock " photos sell fairly well. The picture calls attention to the article. The idea is to get a twenty year old to pick up the paper and read the article. No easy task.
I'll withhold judgment until I can get a better view!
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: SarahTay on March 30, 2011, 07:39:58 PM
Can a university newspaper go so unsupervised and run rampant making their own decisions? I am uneasy knowing these kids may be the next news leaders in our community.
People at university aren't "kids" they are young adults. Unless UNF funds the paper, they have no role in supervising what the content of the paper is. The Journalism Education Association says administration review has no legitimate educational merit and is only a tool leading to censorship.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on March 30, 2011, 08:06:59 PM
I'll withhold judgment until I can get a better view!
OCKLAWAHA
FTW :D
Shocking???
If I had a nickle...
Sarah, I think you are little too sensitive on this kind of topic.
I used to work for UNF Spinnaker as an assistant web editor, and used to go to UNF as a student few years ago. This kind of message is not actually shocking to the YOUNG college students, because the intensity of the content is something that the young college students are already used to thanks to the exposure to the internet, movies, TVs, etc.
This is a newspaper DESIGNED BY and MADE FOR young college students. In other words, it may be shocking to other area where the tolerance of content is much much lower. I would say for whose tolerance of low levels, TOO BAD for you. Welcome to the new world. Suck it up.
May I add clearly on the record... First Coast News is for idiots.
-Josh
I didn't think the front page was inappropriate at all. It looked like something that could go on the cover of the Village Voice or FolioWeekly. The article was informative as well.
Quote from: acme54321 on March 30, 2011, 08:16:30 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on March 30, 2011, 08:06:59 PM
I'll withhold judgment until I can get a better view!
OCKLAWAHA
FTW :D
SHIT! Now I'm gonna have to have my mouth amputated... DAMN ARTICLE!OCKLAWAHA
This is a town that is ever at odds with itself. The Liberal Left sees no problem with the cover art, it's "Progressive". The Conservative Right has the vapors because it suggests oral sex. Having been a journalism major in college you need to tailor your article to the common reader, i.e. short attention span theater. If you can't grab them in the first few sentences or with the photo, the article is hence a failure because it could contain the secret to being rich or eternal life but no one would read it. Now in light of all that I would say that this particular article was a blazing success. People all over town are talking about it and I even saw it posted in Craigslist Rants & Raves. So as the people of this down start dividing camps to wage war over the article the author smiles, because he has done everything a good journalist should do.
The people most upset probably didn't even realize UNF had a newspaper.
Quote from: TheProfessor on March 30, 2011, 11:20:52 PM
I didn't think the front page was inappropriate at all. It looked like something that could go on the cover of the Village Voice or FolioWeekly. The article was informative as well.
I agree. Honestly, how else would you portray an article about that subject matter?? I think it's fine, and it has definitely drawn attention to the issue, so I say good job.
Jacksonville is the same town that couldn't handle The Vagina Monologues being on a theater marquee.
Quote from: copperfiend on March 31, 2011, 09:41:09 AM
Jacksonville is the same town that couldn't handle The Vagina Monologues being on a theater marquee.
Jacksonville is only one chromosome away from being Westboro KY.
QuoteJacksonville is the same town that couldn't handle The Vagina Monologues being on a theater marquee.
Yet has no problem with "Dick's Wings" ;)
Quote from: stephendare on March 31, 2011, 09:54:30 AM
Quote from: copperfiend on March 31, 2011, 09:41:09 AM
Jacksonville is the same town that couldn't handle The Vagina Monologues being on a theater marquee.
That was the choice of the theatre director, Tom Fallon (a good friend actually) not the city. He got in trouble for it with the Vagina Monologues people. Its part of their contract.
I think he chickened out and called it the 'Hoo Ha' monologues instead.
Which to my ear is actually funnier, but I don't think that was the point.
In fact, I cant think of a funnier thing to call a vagina than a 'hoo ha'. It sounds simultaneously childish, tribal and embarrassed.
I know the city of Jacksonville had nothing to do with it because it was in Atlantic Beach. My point was more on the citizenry of this area. People called and complained about the word Vagina being on a theater marquee.
I thought it was a great cover and great informative article. I fail to see what is so offensive.
Quote from: Shwaz on March 31, 2011, 09:52:48 AM
Quote from: copperfiend on March 31, 2011, 09:41:09 AM
Jacksonville is the same town that couldn't handle The Vagina Monologues being on a theater marquee.
Jacksonville is only one chromosome away from being Westboro KY.
THAT is scary... But you're right :)
You are missing Sarah's point, and sorry, I have to agree with her. Her problem isn't the information. She agrees with the topic. Her problem is the objectifying of the woman's body on the cover. The woman is scantily clad; the man is fully dressed. Why isn't the man in a g-string? If you are going to make this woman into a scantily clad object, why not the man?
That's the issue. It's one the women's libbers have been pointing out for quite some time, and you are all still missing the point.
Sarah, glad you pointed it out. Obviously, someone needed to bring the discussion back into focus.
Well , I didn't write the story or design the cover , but I would have been okay with with the guy in skimpy clothing. I get what you're saying. :) Sorry I missed the point .
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on March 31, 2011, 12:44:43 PM
Her problem is the objectifying of the woman's body on the cover. That's the issue.
Too bad her rant just comes across as an hysterical anti-sex screed.
Well.. she is entitled to her opinion, and I now get it. I just did not think about it in that light, so to speak ..
Thank you Debbie...
In response to everyone:
I use the term 'kids' loosely - and sarcastically here in the context of discussing this small group of students. I am aware that most students at a university are "young adults", being one of them. There are an equal amount of adults and 17 year-olds, mind you.
No I am not on the staff now. However, I also use to work for the Spinnaker - for 2 1/2 years - so I am aware of the "for students by students" mission statement... you can save the deliverance for someone else.
Let me be clear - I titled the post as I did because "people are talking about it" - at school, on local news networks, and on larger blog sites. I personally am not shocked BY ANYTHING, anymore. Nowhere in my rant did I say I was shocked. But yes shocked in the fact that it has drawn so much attention, but hey, you're right that bad attention is better than none at all.
Yes it is an independent, student-run paper. But the school's student government funds them - they are a paid staff and SG has the right to revoke such payment, which they did. They voted for the first time in years to strip their funds for three days - making them work without pay to put out this current week's issue.
I'm not sure why the girls didn't step up, suppose they had no problem with it either. But my thing is, I have no problem, again, pushing the envelope. I have no problem with the "attention-grabbing" aspect, I'm aware of the elements that make for great journalism. I praise his boldness. It did get people to pick up the paper, but that doesn't mean they'll pick up next week's or the next. This is the most, and one of very few, "provocative" cover they've ever had. If the intention was for shock value to jumpstart circulation, be consistent.
My point here is if you're going to have a passionate cover, you need to have a passionate staff. They aren't being reactive or care to explain or really have a good excuse other than "it's necessary" and something people need to know about. And AGAIN, I'm not commenting on the story alone nor the picture alone. I have no problem with each on its own - I have a problem with the pairing of the two. I don't see the connection. And they aren't making it for me. I'm not ashamed to say I'm a woman and I found the cover, as a woman, offensive. Why isn't the guy stripped down? The picture inside on Pg. 5 is also the girl "receiving". Why didn't they switch it up? It says to me that woman are the ones spreading it. I rarely have a problem with any news angle or story, but I have a problem here, sorry.
I can see I'll have to pay my dues and be initiated on this site. I appreciate and respect all of your opinions. I have a lot to learn and I am excited to do so. :)
Welcome, Sarah
YABSNI
Yet Another Bull Shit Non Issue
"hysterical rant?" Well excuse me for being passionate and having an opinion, surprising a young female has one, I know.
"anti-sex"?? HA if you only knew...
Quote from: SarahTay on March 31, 2011, 01:39:40 PM
surprising a young female has one, I know.
Please. Check the victimhood at the door.
Quote from: SarahTay on March 31, 2011, 01:17:39 PM
I am aware that most students at a university are "young adults", being one of them. There are an equal amount of adults and 17 year-olds, mind you.
You're an aspiring journalist. I'm going to need to see a source for that statistic. It strains credibility.
Though I do appreciate your passionate opinion Sarah, I disagree on the cover. I realize that I'm speaking from a male's point of view, but to me, regardless of attire, it seems like it could be viewed as equally, if not more degrading to the male.
Ask yourself this question:
What if instead of a fully clothed male doing the deed for a partially dressed female, it was a fully clothed female doing the dead for a partially clothed male, how would you react? I'm guessing the average female would be WAY, WAY, WAY more offended.
Don't get me wrong, objectification is a real issue that has real consequences on the female population, I just don't see it being a real issue with this particular cover.
Quote from: Jimmy on March 31, 2011, 02:05:43 PM
Quote from: SarahTay on March 31, 2011, 01:17:39 PM
I am aware that most students at a university are "young adults", being one of them. There are an equal amount of adults and 17 year-olds, mind you.
You're an aspiring journalist. I'm going to need to see a source for that statistic. It strains credibility.
Jimmy, it was just another sarcastic response to someone not getting my sarcasm in the original post:
[People at university aren't "kids" they are young adults.]
Like I said @ the beginning of the second, I used kids loosely and sarcastically. But beyond that defense, wanted to point out not everyone at a college is a "young adult" - evident by the vast age range in all the classes I've taken. I will not claim it as fact though :) guess I should've made that clear when I said it. Now that you mention it though, I would like to know the demographics of UNF age-wise. Hmm...
Thanks for clarifying. I'm having a hard time picking up your sarcasm in print here.
as am I
QuoteI found the cover, as a woman, offensive. Why isn't the guy stripped down? The picture inside on Pg. 5 is also the girl "receiving". Why didn't they switch it up? It says to me that woman are the ones spreading it.
Would you have preferred the male in the chair with the woman kneeling in front of him? Then she could be "giving". To me at least... the woman on the cover seems to be in charge... male kneeling before her... she with a handful of his hair... my guess is she is telling him exactly "what to do". As for the inside pic... it sounds like you would prefer the woman on top... well... I cannot argue with that logic... it is a fave of mine too... 8)
hehehe Bridge Troll ... You naughty .... ehhh nevermind ;)
Quote from: KenFSU on March 31, 2011, 02:06:15 PM
Ask yourself this question:
What if instead of a fully clothed male doing the deed for a partially dressed female, it was a fully clothed female doing the dead for a partially clothed male, how would you react? I'm guessing the average female would be WAY, WAY, WAY more offended.
Don't get me wrong, objectification is a real issue that has real consequences on the female population, I just don't see it being a real issue with this particular cover.
Ken, I'm not so much offended that they used a woman as they did, but that in the article they don't clarify that only women can contract HPV - it gives the impression that both males and females can get it. Then they also bring up oral sex between two people of the same gender. But, they use the female as the receiver, and therefore "the carrier", in both the cover and inside image. They should of varied it - one of the guy doing the deed and one of the girl. Or since he introduced into the article the risk of contraction via homosexual activity, using two images of heterosexual activity was the wrong choice. If it was an image of the guy as the receiver for both, I would be just as turned off only because they're saying something by singling in on one gender. And since they do so with woman, why does she have to be half naked while he's fully clothed? The objectification of women gets me here only in that context and in what the topic's @. Are "slutty" women the only ones to blame for the hpv grapevine?
Quote from: SarahTay on March 31, 2011, 03:07:35 PM
but that in the article they don't clarify that only women can contract HPV - it gives the impression that both males and females can get it.
methinks you should do some more readng before you post.....
QuoteMuch of the information about HPV virus (human papillomavirus) centers on women, since having the virus increases their risk of getting cervical cancer. But HPV virus in men can cause health problems, too. It's important for men to understand how to reduce the risks of HPV infection.
HPV infection can increase a man's risk of getting genital cancers, although these cancers are not common. HPV can also cause genital warts in men, just as in women.
More than half of men who are sexually active in the U.S. will have HPV at some time in their life. Often, a man will clear the virus on his own, with no health problems
http://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/hpv-genital-warts/hpv-virus-men
It implies that both can get it because it's true.
Quote from: SarahTay on March 31, 2011, 03:07:35 PM
...in the article they don't clarify that only women can contract HPV - it gives the impression that both males and females can get it.
Males most certainly can contract HPV: http://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/hpv-genital-warts/hpv-virus-men
N-RW, you beat me to it!
a rarity, but I had already read up on it after the 'drama' of the cover started circulating.
lol. yes well too bad this wasn't a piece on sexual liberation or sex on random school equipment...
I'm sure you were only being sarcastic when you said that only women can contract HPV, and it just went over our heads.
Nice, finehoe. Exactly.
Yeah, men and women get HPV. Most people need the vaccine (at least most people who are students at UNF and JU and FSCJ and high schools and, probably, middle schools).
No, no, no. I KNOW that both can get it. I said the article doesn't say only women can get it so why do the visuals portray only woman "having it"? Both can get it, we all know that. Just saying they should've switched things up.
but thanks finehoe - good lookin' out for me.
especially the latter ......;)
Quote from: Debbie Thompson on March 31, 2011, 12:44:43 PM
You are missing Sarah's point, and sorry, I have to agree with her. Her problem isn't the information. She agrees with the topic. Her problem is the objectifying of the woman's body on the cover. The woman is scantily clad; the man is fully dressed. Why isn't the man in a g-string? If you are going to make this woman into a scantily clad object, why not the man?
That's the issue. It's one the women's libbers have been pointing out for quite some time, and you are all still missing the point.
Sarah, glad you pointed it out. Obviously, someone needed to bring the discussion back into focus.
What if it was the OTHER way around where the girl is giving a guy a blowjob. I think that would be MORE degrading to women, because it makes them look like they are giving the pleasure. I can go on all day about this, but I don't want to spill the dirty details. It would be too graphical to show the dirty areas.
The article talks about HPV from ORAL SEX. This means using your face, hands, etc. to engage in that activity. The cover portrays that pretty darn well.
The way the cover it is now, in my OWN opinion, is to honor the women and give them a sense of empowerment by portraying them in control while the guy is deliberately offering his service to her. She deserves the pleasure and respect. The way this cover is set up is to prove the acceptable censorship for the specific area, while giving the clean and shocking message of what's happening.
I honestly do think the editors had lot of things on their mind and steered through different obstructions in order to arrive at this final rendering of the cover. This is not one of the most shocking covers they ever did. They even did more intense ones in the past.
I personally think the two REAL issues are the HPV and how sensitive people are to a shocking media content. It is pretty sad how the second issue is part of this real deal.
-Josh
What Josh said. Really, we're all adults. The people at UNF are adults.
This kind of thinking is why a member of the Florida House is being reprimanded for using the word "uterus" in house chambers. Honestly, people should stop being afraid of their bodies. Or at least keep their fears to themselves.
No I agree with you Josh. I'm not shocked at all, and agree that it's sad that people in this community and in other areas are (given posts I've seen on sites/blogs and the amount of attention it's received in the local news).
And again, I'm not upset about the photo itself. I just don't think it was the best one to illustrate this topic. For another story, sure.
This is why I always use REBEL YELL as a mouthwash!
OCKLAWAHA
^ Leave it to Ock to lighten the mood. :)
yup that Ock... always comes to the rescue with humor ;)
LALALALALA SEX ISNT REAL BABIES COME FROM STORKS
What josh said and ock +1
Specifically the Vlasic Pickle Stork ;)
We tend to underestimate how much younger people know about the human anatomy. Reminds me of a joke...
A mother had a routine of bathing with her son ever since he was a baby. It was convenient for her and it allowed her to bond with him from an early age. As the boy grew older, she began to ask herself when to wean him from the mommy-son baths. She decided that she would discontinue the practice when the boy became aware of physical differences.
One morning, while the two were in the tub, she stood to get a towel. Her son pointed up at the area between her legs.
"What is that, mommy?"
The mother paused and had to think for a moment.
"That is where I was split with the golden axe."
The boy, without missing a beat, hollered...
"You're telling me that you got hit in the ["See you next Tuesday"] with a golden axe!? How crazy is that?!"
The son started taking baths alone the next day.
MORAL (And there is one): It will shock you what young people already know.
Quote from: Jaxson on April 01, 2011, 12:51:23 PM
As the boy grew older, she began to ask herself when to wean him from the mommy-son baths.
I knew this crotch-shaving fad would end badly. ::)
LOL @ the two above posts ;)
I just love how this thread ends with a nice bang and laughters. +1 for y'all!
-Josh
<salutes Josh> :)