Case Closed

After a long semester of researching and posting, we have learned a lot about how magazines, newspapers and books represent archaeology. Through our individual posts we explored different perspectives and examined the ways in which different readers interpret literature about archaeology. Though we had our struggles and at times frustrations, we worked as a cohesive team to unearth some skeletons about National Geographic and other publications. As an archaeological team, we dug into the pages from Smithsonian to the New York Times to discover the treasures hidden in the print. Dusting off our magnifying glasses, we examined and analyzed, fitting the pieces together to construct a blog.

- Jessie, Xue, Ariel, and Alana

I think one of the most powerful aspects that this blog showcases is that of individual perspectives. It has become clear that after reading an article, we all take away something different. Some people focus on the imagery, others on the title or content. This is important as it shows us that there are many facets to archaeological articles that need to be examined and critiqued. Some articles are full of archaeological stereotypes, perpetuating the idea that archaeologists are all really treasure hunters. Others, clearly reference primary sources, research their topic and adequately present an archaeological story to the public. It is like Gugliotta said in "Communicating Archaeology to the Public," "[it is] both exciting and exasperating...covering and writing about archaeology" (13). While many enjoy reading about archaeology, it seems like a challenging field to communicate with the public about as few know a lot about archaeology. Therefore, after doing this project I have learned a lot about what makes a good archaeological article and have much more respect for the authors who put the time and effort into writing those articles.

- Jessie

 Before I started the blog, I never really questioned the absolutely authority of magazines, newspapers, and books. In the former two media, the articles are generally concise, reporting on specific events or discoveries, and provide bare background to give context to a story. The sway of the articles can be drastically different and even can change based on where they are. A magazine and news group can report separate takes on the same piece. The most valuable lesson I learned from the blog project was simply how fluid and swayed news can be. The same finding can be reported from the human perspective in the magazine and a technical view online. Beyond that, magazines and newspapers are assumed by many to truthfully educate readers about certain topics. They serve different functions even in the way people read them. Books, as a contrast, are more interpretive and especially in the childrens' books examined, they present archaeology as a discovery. How readers perceive each article or book depends on so many external factors and can influence reactions in tremendous ways. The most important take-away from this blog project is simply how media must be seen with a grain of rice, looked at from all perspectives and are an individual interpretive experience.
- Ariel

Honestly, when we started this class, my archaeological knowledge went about as deep as National Geographic's cover page. While I appreciated the discipline in general, I really didn't know much about it–and especially how it was perceived in the media. Magazines and newspapers practically control how archaeology is seen by the general public, with the exception of the internet. Most people have no small notion about what archaeology is really about, and the role of these publications is crucial to widening understanding about the field itself. In order for us to continue learning about our past, archaeology needs to continue.

At first, I thought this assignment was going to be, well, a bit hokey. I didn't know a thing about blogging or twitter, but as the semester progressed, I realized just how much information can be transferred via the internet (a whole lot), and how ideas grow instantaneously. This project opened my eyes to being more aware of what information I take in. Just because something is in print does not necessarily make it true. Illegitimate citations and false stories are everywhere. Bias cannot be avoided. Not only will I take these lessons with me when I read on about scientific, historical, and archaeological discoveries, but in the current world around us. When I watch the news, I have no plans to be a blind believer. I want to know where my information is coming from, how factual it is, and the kind of bias affecting it. In truth, I just want to be informed.
-Alana

I believe that we were provided a difficult task-- to create a blog critiquing newspapers, magazines, and books-- but as a group, we did a good job of touching upon different aspects. Although it was not our original goal, we found different areas of each type of media to analyze and discuss. It was hard to find a direction at first but as we got further into the blog project, we found a good balance of analysis and personality in our posts. In the short amount of time allotted us, we had the opportunity to show the class, and whomever else reads this blog, different aspects of what make certain types of media effective or not useful. It was a long process, but we worked hard to inform the public about authorship, how certain books are useful in capturing the attention of children, some articles are almost identical to others etc. We had a lot of critiques for all the media but I think we can agree that any exposure to archaeology is good. I, personally, do not know how many people are archaeologists or aspire to be, but it seems that there is a small community of them. The more people that can be encouraged or swayed to becoming an archaeologist, the better.

Archaeology is an important subject. It teaches us about our history, where we came from, who are ancestors are, how life has been evolving and such. Without knowledge about the past, we cannot move forward or progress. Archaeology digs into the mysteries of the past. They reveal to us history that is not written in books, newspapers, or magazines.

From this blog project, I have learned how to look at news stories with a more critical eye. I am not as easily convinced by stories. I think that authors do the best with what they have, and in many cases write well, but a lot of them do not seem qualified to be writing about archaeology based on the same-ness of their material, the recycling of materials, and the fact that many are not actually archaeologists. But this does not mean I will stop reading said articles. Any form of news is good to know about whether it is true or not. Readers just have to be cautious and wary about what they are reading, which is basically what we have tried to stress in this blog. 
-Xue

The People Behind the Words

After reading many archaeological articles in magazines, newspapers and books, we thought we would look back at the authors who wrote them. Authors can write impressive articles filled with helpful information, interesting tid-bits, catchy quotes, experts, diagrams and photographs. Others may skimp on the details and use information from other secondary sources instead of using the primary source. We thought that it would be interesting to research the different authors of some of our articles and see just who is being hired to write them.

Here are some of authors who, through our perilous journey through countless magazines and newspapers, we found to stand out against the rest.

Author John Wilford from the New York Times was a science correspondent for the Newspaper and covered a multitude of topics from the Apollo missions to the DNA analysis of King Tut's mummified body. His writing is extremely strong as he clearly reads and understands the primary sources. He brings in experts to share their opinions and writes in a way that is clear and interesting to readers. For example, In 2012 Wilford wrote an article covering the findings of DNA analysis of King Tut. Entitled, “Malaria is a Likely Killer in King Tut’s Post-Mortem,” Wilford effectively pulls readers in and suggests a cause of death rather than making a grandiose, definitive statement as to what killed the king. Use of the words “a likely killer,” is powerful as they suggest rather than state that malaria was the killer. Additionally, Wilford tells readers that, “scientists have now determined the most likely agents of death: a severe bout of malaria combined with a degenerative bone condition” (Wilford 1). This sentence, again, suggests rather than states absolutely that malaria was the killer by using the words “most likely agent”. This is important as the Journal of Tropical Medicine & International Health primary article made no definitive claim as to the effects of malaria on the King (Timmann and Meyer, 2010). With strong primary research, an objective journalistic voice, Wilford is among the best authors that we have seen thus far. While not a professional archaeologist, Wilford's extensive research skills and multitude of experience in the field has made him an expert archaeological author. -Jessie

Julian Smith, a travel-writer was found to be a very well-written author about archaeology in Smithsonian. Specifically, he wrote "Tomb of the Chantress," an article about the dicsovery of an ancient tomb in the valley of the Kings. This was a very well-written article, full of detail, photographs, expert opinions and explanations for the less-arcaheologically inclined folk. As a travel write, Smith has had a lot of experience writing for magazines that cover archaeology such as National Geographic. His experience in the field is evident in his clear writing, interesting story-telling and scientific example. While not a professional archaeologist, Smith tackles archaeological discoveries like a pro. -Jessie

In one of the earlier posts on this blog, I wrote about an article in National Geographic written by Sarah Zielinski. According to her professional webpage, she is a freelance writer and editor. She boasts that she is an "award-winning science writer and editor with 10 years of experience covering a wide breadth of science." She has done a lot of work with Smithsonian, Science, Science News, and NPR.com. Although there is no mention of her degrees or her special areas of interest, it is obvious that she is qualified to write about science. She has had lots of experience writing about a wide range of scientific subjects and has spent time working for well-known media sources. I guess that I should not have been surprised that National Geographic would have good authors for their articles, even ones that are just short pieces for their daily news section.     -Xue

I also thought it would be interesting to get a feel for who Mary Pope Osborne, the author of Magic Treehouse was. She has a big fan base, children and adults (who read the series to their children or read them as children themselves), and thus has a great influence on youth. She wrote a few of her books about archaeology and dinosaurs. It is interesting because on her webpage, she has a biography about her life. In it, she details her adventures. But she also mentions that she became a religion major so she could learn "as much as I could about other cultures." Although this is not exactly an archaeology major, and she does not specifically have a background in science or archaeology, she is a fictional children's writer. Her main goal is to write easy-to-read children's books that are popular and accessible to everyone. She does this brilliantly with Jack and Annie, the adventurers of her series. I think that although her books including archaeology are not scientific, they are a great way to get young readers excited about the subject matter and encourage them to read more about it. She has an interesting story and series that captures youth and provides adventures of children during their early years. -Xue

Authors can come from different backgrounds, and yes, some are less qualified to write articles or books, but for the most part, it appears that many are well informed and educated in writing scientific news. It would be great if more archaeologists were also authors but it is difficult to try and get archaeologists to take on so many tasks (there are only so many of them). The main thing archaeologists need to do now is to get more material out there or encourage their peers to write different types of articles and stop using the same exact sources when writing.

The Future of Reading

As we talked about during our presentation today, it is becoming harder and harder to access written materials–especially with the lure of the internet with its endless possibilities at your fingertips. Everyone seems to prefer written publications, but no one (especially college students) like to pay for them. At what point do we pony up and really pay for the tangible materials?                                              

But enough of an anti-technology rant. When it comes to magazines and newspapers, there is a real tactile experience that goes along with them. I love the ink that stains my fingers from the newspaper, and the way it crinkles when my dad folds it in one hand while sipping his coffee. Something about newspapers just brings me back to mornings. And magazines, well, they come is many shapes and sizes. From Cosmo to Archaeology Magazine, there is so much material out there for every kind of reader, and it is specialized to a point that you know exactly what you're getting yourself into just by the front cover. Sometimes there are even bonus fold-outs, like the old National Geographic maps or perfume testers...

But regardless of what you are reading, whether it's the New York Times or Highlights for Kids, you're sitting down and reading. You're not scrolling, barely skimming articles. There is a really big difference between reading online and reading a physical publication. While e-readers and nooks are quickly blurring that line, it's difficult, and a little scary, to think about where the future of reading is going.

Indian Jones and the Magazine Bandit

Here is a short parody about archaeological articles in magazines, one of the forms of media we examined in this blog. This video was not edited...

-Jessie, Xue, Ariel, Alana

The Confusing Hunt for Archaeological News Online

I realized recently that searching for news on Archaeology can be really difficult. For the average person browsing the web in search of news about new Archaeological discoveries, it is difficult to navigate the online webpages of newspapers and news agencies like the Associated Press. The easiest way to find news articles related to the topic is to include the name of a news source and Archaeology in the subject line for a search on Google. But when you try to navigate a website, it is almost impossible. It requires lots of time and deductive skills.

With news about more common subjects, like the world, or economy, it is usually a lot easier to find the articles related to the subject. With archaeology, you have to look through all the tabs at the top or side of the page to try and find the section where archaeology is reported. It is a confusing and sometimes not logical process. 

With a newspaper like The New York Times, archaeology is covered in the science section under "Archaeology and Anthropology. And even then, a lot of the news is from earlier in the year. The most recent article on the first page is from September 11th, 2012. New discoveries and articles have come out since then. But an avid New York Times reader would not know because their webpage for archaeological news is not up to date.

With The Boston Globe, archaeology is found by clicking News-->More in News-->Nation. 

With the Associated Press, you can spend a lot of time on the homepage searching for stories. But the easiest way is to go to the search browser on Associated Press and type in "archaeology" or something related. Otherwise, you will waste lots of time scrolling through stories completely unrelated to what you are looking for.

I do not know why these websites are so confusing when it comes to archaeology. I would have struggled to find news about archaeology if I had not used Google to search for the subject and then go from there to find the news sources. Exploring each news sources' webpage is too confusing and complicated since the search for archaeological news on each one varies a lot. If there was a way to inform news sources about their webpages, I would highly encourage them to make their news more accessible to the average viewer.

Enticing Titles

It has become common for news companies to publish very similar articles about the same subjects. A week ago, a story was released about stone spear tips that are “surprisingly old.” It suggests that the early human ancestors may have been smarter than we give them credit for.

- New York Times

The titles of three different news sources are all similar yet different. For once, they actually tried to get readers hooked by discussing different aspects of the discovery. The New York Times discusses how the stone spear made work easier for hunters. The National Geographic approaches the subject by emphasizing the age of the stone spear tips by comparing this new discovery to finding an iPod in Ancient Rome, which shows how crazy this is since iPods have only been around for a decade and could never be found there. Finally the Huffington Post attacks the subject by saying that weapons were created earlier than scientists had believed.

- National Geographic

The angles for these stories varies a little although, in the end, they are all about the same subject and have content that is even more similar. The Huffington Post and The New York Times have articles that are almost identical, even in length. The National Geographic article is longer and goes more in-depth, touching on the subjects of efficient hunting, increased brain size, proof that they were indeed spear tips, and more. The other two articles do not even try to share that much knowledge. This could be because the authors of the other two articles are not as concerned with archaeological discoveries, they report on all that goes on in the world, not on just nature, animals, and science, whereas National Geographic is completely dedicated to it.

 

- Huffington Post

Archaeology in the Afternoon

Think back to your childhood and I'd bet most readers were a fan of the Magic Tree House book series. You know, the books about Jack and Annie, the world's coolest kids who traveled through time and space to visit exotic lands and eras. Probably the first historical fiction any of us read, the books took us on an adventure and taught us a lot along the way about history and cultures.

With a range of topics from battles to animals to empires, the Magic Tree House series served to fascinate kids with the past of all kinds. For kids, the ability to capture attention spans with something as simple as a fantasy trip to the pyramids is huge. It sets the stage for interest in history, archaeology and nature that allows them to imagine the scenes for themselves.

I can't really remember how accurate the series was, but I do remember being in love with the books as a kid. After talking to friends, I can affirm that I was not the only one. Truly, that kind of enthusiasm for learning and reading is what is most important in preserving knowledge of the ancient world. I know that many people don't care about reading today, much less reading about old and foreign civilizations, but I'd bet for most people, there was a time in their past when they were all about the Magic Tree House, or some similar series.

Even if books like this don't give the most unbiased or factual information, kids see learning as a cool adventure! Maybe that leads into the archaeologist-as-an-adventurer stereotype, but so what? As long as people are interested and learning, it doesn't really matter.