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.

Oohh... I think I'll read that!

Looking at the effectiveness of titles.

National Geographic Magazine

“Thracian Gold Treasure Discovered in Bulgaria”

Ker Than, November 10, 2012

           
GOLD?! Ok, I gotta read this! This title is immediately eye catching as it pulls readers in by the allure of treasure. It appears that National Geographic feels the need to continuously perpetuate the stereotype of archaeology as a treasure hunt, taking away from the legitimacy of this scientific profession. Use of the words “gold and treasure,” immediately pull readers in as many are fascinated with treasure and this title appears to satisfy readers’ inherent need to treasure hunt. The title is written in plane black lettering, juxtaposed against a white background, making the words stand out. Additionally, without reading the article, this title appears a bit vague as it could imply to some readers that the article will discuss the multitude of treasure that was found. Yet, upon reading the article, only a few gold pieces were discussed. Therefore, while this is clearly a biased title and perhaps misleading, it effectively pulls readers in. 

Smithsonian Magazine

“Diving for the Secrets of the Battle of the Atlantic”

 Jim Morrison, January 18, 2012

           
SECRETS, battles, adventure...oh my! This title was initially interesting as it caught my attention without emphasizing any archaeological stereotype like National Geographic did. Use of the word “secrets,” was powerful and will likely pull readers in by the intrigue of mystery. However, this title makes no assertions or assumptions, simply states what the article will discuss in an interesting, non-biased way. Additionally, many readers may not know what the “Battle of the Atlantic” means, adding to the mystery of this article, making it likely that many will read it. This title is therefore effective and very well crafted.

The Boston Globe

“Ancient rock carvings stolen in Sierra Nevada”

         
WHO done it?! This article is captivating as it plays on the “excitement” of archaeology. Many who read this title will most likely immediately imagine Indian Jones running through Sierra Nevada retrieving the stolen artifacts. Ancient artifacts, thievery and mystery are all perpetuated stereotypes of archaeology. There is also a certain level of drama that this title creates, pulling readers in. However, I have to give the author credit because this is certainly an eye-catching title. It is hard to find the balance between objectivity and intrigue in crafting a title. Additionally, the lettering is thicker than that of National Geographic, which made this title stand out. 

The New York Times

“Disease Diagnosed in a 500-Year-Old Mummy”

 HOW, what disease, I gotta read more! After reading the article, I found this title to be completely appropriate. A lung infection was diagnosed in a 500-year-old mummy using DNA analysis. This title therefore appears unbiased and also does not emphasize any archaeological stereotypes or use drama to pull readers in. The intrigue of this title is simply the surprise factor – who would have guessed we could diagnose a 500-year-old person? 

Vikings? In Canada?

Most people know about the Viking settlements on the East coast of Canada and Northern US, and some people also believe that this occupation extended as far west as Minnesota. Though this has been proven a hoax, the idea of Vikings in North America before what is usually considered European contact still fascinates many.

Archaeologists digging... typical.

A recent article in National Geographic reports about new evidence suggesting not only more Viking settlements than those previously found, but more contact than though occurred between Native Americans and Vikings. The evidence cites various furs, metallurgic products, ivories, and other trade goods in the archaeological record linking the two groups. The discovery is not wholly shocking, but it certainly puts more weight behind Viking occupation of the so-called New World.

While reading the article, one sentence really stood out to me: "The cords turned out to be expertly woven Viking yarn, identical in technique to yarn produced by Viking women living in Greenland in the 14th century." Maybe this is just a bias from my academic focus, but this seemed to me like possibly a misinterpretation of data. I'm not saying the discovery isn't authentic. I just have a problem with the question of craftsmanship and the evolution of production. The cords may be similar or even the same as those made in Greenland, but I don't like how it is assumed to be a Viking tradition, rather than Native American.

The find is not too groundbreaking, since nothing is conclusive yet, but it's still exciting in the archaeological world. If proven true, it not only contradicts with the idea that the Vikings were here for a short time then abandoned it, but challenges the model of contact as well. Since the Vikings were settled here and in many other places of the Northern Hemisphere, they were avid traders, therefore dispersing new European goods throughout the continent earlier than thought. I don't know how much of an effect this had on North America, but it could certainly prove with a little more investigation that many goods or inventions thought to be native to this continent are actually imported.

I guess it's nice, if you want a dirty scarf

The article itself is well written enough, though certainly not targeted to a younger audience. Interestingly, National Geographic posted coverage of the same discovery in their magazine as well as this article online. Printed in the November 2012 issue, the other article focuses much more on the human aspect of the discovery, rather than the technicalities discussed online. It is also told more like a story, following the chronology of the discovery, the history of Viking occupation, and the implications of the little piece of yarn.

Both pieces discuss the discovery and put it in context, but their focus is tailored to the media and audience. When one sits down to read a magazine, they do so fully aware that it is a time commitment and are prepared to peruse as much as they have time for, soaking it in leisurely. Magazines are often used to relax and provoke thought while doing so. On the contrary, the internet is scattered with webpage after webpage, therefore the attention span is much shorter. The article must get to the technicalities of the discovery first and the readers who stay attune get the less important news at the end. Inherently, these media function in their specific way. National Geographic simply figured out an effective way to present the same discovery to magazine readers and internet users.

Looking at Length Part II

Contrasting the shorter article, I decided to examine a longer article to compare its effectiveness. In August 2012, Archaeology magazine published the article “Tomb of the Chantress”.  It was the cover story and therefore given a 5 page spread in the middle of the magazine. Starting at the beginning is a large photograph of the chantresses sarcophagus covered in dust, surrounded by rocks as if it was just discovered. The photograph spans two pages and is therefore very powerful. The size of the photograph emphasizes the crumbling rocks and dusty wooden casket, pulling the readers into the story. Imagery is extremely influential in magazines, and as this is a larger article, the author, Julian Smith, was able to use a larger photograph, increasing the effectiveness of the article.

Another “tool” that longer articles are able to use to pull readers in that shorter articles are note able to is the use of a caption underneath the title. In this article the caption reads, “a newly discovered burial chamber in the valley of the Kings provides a rare glimpse into the life of an ancient Egyptian singer” (Smith, 29). The caption is interesting as it summarizes what the article is going to be about, this allows readers to learn something without having to read the whole article to gather information, as many would have to do with a shorter article. This also allows readers to decide if they want to read the article at all, something shorter articles lack. However, readers may flip through to see how long the article is, and many may be deterred by the length, which is where shorter article appear to be advantageous. 

Another advantage of longer articles is detail. In this article Smith gives extensive background information on where the Chantress was found, how archaeologist Susanne Bickel and her team found her and what they did to excavate her. Smith explains in detail that at “eight feet down, they came upon the upper edge of a door blocked by large stones” (28). Smith continues to explain, in detail, how Bickel and her team began the long process of extracting the Chantress. Although some may find such detail to be trivial and unnecessary, I believe it adds depth to this article and provides evidence of the scientific method of archaeology, which many who read this magazine (usually archaeology buffs) will probably appreciate.

            
Finally, this article provides much more context, explaining the importance of the Chantress to society at the time, even discussing the role of music in Egyptian society during her time period. Music was “believed to soothe the gods and encourage them to provide for their worshippers” (Smith, 31). Such context shows the readers why this Chantress was so famous in her day, it also educates about an ancient world. Smith brings in many experts to discuss the role of music in society, the paintings on the sarcophagus and experts from the excavation team. With more space, the author is able to bring in more outside sources, something a shorter article cannot do.

            
Although a longer article seems to have many advantages to a shorter article, including more photographs, details and experts, shorter articles have their own advantages. Faster to read, less space and therefore less expensive to print, shorter articles are a necessary addition to any magazine or newspaper. I would not say that either is better than the other, rather they are both advantageous in different ways. Choosing which to read simply depends on how much time you have.

Smith, Julian. "Tomb of the Chantress." Archaeology Aug. 2012: 28-32. Print. 25 Nov. 2012.

Limits on Length

Recently, our blog group has focused on writing shorter reviews of archaeological articles. This made me think, how do real reporters do it? How do they fit all of their research and interviews into a limited amount of space? Editors give limits on word count and paragraph number as there is only so much space in a magazine. Therefore, I set out to find a shorter article to see how real reporters effectively write condensed articles. Skimming through today’s National Geographic, Smithsonian, or Archaeology Magazine, you will usually find long articles that span 3-4 pages. However, I think there is something to be said for a shorter article; quicker to read and it saves space, many are more likely to read a short article in its entirety than a long article. Therefore, when I found an article entitled “Mass Grave Mystery,” in Archaeology that only spanned half a page, I quickly read the whole thing and was quite impressed with the amount of information the author was able to get across in such a short amount of space.

The author, Matthew Brunwasser, immediately pulls readers in by setting the scene of this mass grave. He explains that this site was “the most thoroughly excavated ancient site in the country” (Brunwasser, 27).  It was then surprising to readers when the author explained that in fall 2011, archaeologists unearthed a massive unknown grave along the edge of the settlement of Scupi (an old Roman colony). The unlikelihood of such an event is captivating and Brunwasser successfully captures readers’ attention by beginning the article this way. Additionally, little detail has been given about this colony, yet enough background information has been given for readers to make sense of the article. Brunwasser continues to note that the bones all showed evidence of violence in cutting, breakage, and decapitation. Brunwasser then uses quotes from head archaeologist, Lence Jovana, to show her opinion on the find. Bringing in the head archaeologist on this project greatly strengthened the validity of this article and added depth to what could have been a rather brief overview of an archaeological find. Finally Brunwasser brings in another expert in the field of Roman battlefield archaeology, Phil Freeman, to speculate along with Jovana about the cause of such a mass grave. In one final paragraph the possibilities of a mass military execution, or an execution resulting from conflicts against the Roman Empire are suggested as causes for this mass grave. Brunwasser appears to make no speculations on his own, relying on the input from experts such as Jovana and Freeman as to the cause of this mass grave.

            
With limited space, this author wrote a compelling article about the findings of a mass grave in the Roman colony of Scupi. There appeared to be no bias in the article, which was strongly supported by experts. This was, in my opinion, a good example of how reporters today maximize the space they are given to write an article. 

Brunwasser, Matthew. "Mass Grave Mystery." Archaeology Oct. 2012: 27. Print. 25 Nov. 2012.

Who can you trust?

I've run into a lot of frustration with our final paper project, and not one bit of it has to do with writer's block. We trust magazines and newspapers for accurate information–but how well-documented is it really? While trying to find a primary source, I came across an awesome National Geographic article on gigantism. It was super interesting, but for the life of me I could not figure out what the primary source was. There was one link that brought me to a journal on endocrinology, but not the specific study the article was citing. Not being able to find any factual information on the topic, I was left to wonder, where does National Geographic get its information? Why isn't that outlet more accessible? I have to say, it left a rather sour taste in my mouth. Either way, the article is pretty interesting, ya'll should take a look at it. The photograph shows the difference between a normal Roman man's shinbone and the giant's shinbone (both lived during the same period). Crikey.

Being able to trust your sources is crucial, especially in the field of archaeology. People put up hoaxes and false discoveries over time. And while it's pretty safe to say that National Geographic's info can be trusted, I'd like to be sure. Magazines should proudly present their sources, not squirrel them away like embarrassing family photos. 

Hurricane Sandy

Though Hurricane Sandy doesn't really qualify as archaeological news (not for another 100 years or so probably), it's hard to ignore the wide-reaching impact of the super storm. It's crazy how much media (newspapers and magazines included) coverage it's getting. Everyone wants the latest updates so they can get the news out fast. It was interesting to see how National Geographic became a mini news magazine during the storm, seeing as they don't typically focus on breaking weather news. We wanted to look at two different aspects of an article from National Geographic. Jessie looked at titles while I looked at the photograph that heads the article. We both tried to make our post only 50 words to practice getting our point across in brief. Hopefully it helps us get better at writing our abstracts!

With inclement weather increasing, should boardwalks be rebuilt, or redesigned? This was very interesting as it suggested, from an archaeological perspective what the history of boardwalks might look like. Perhaps future archaeologists will unearth remnants from New Jersey’s boardwalks, displaying the wooden slats in the Museum of modern art.

- Jessie

Much can be said through photography, and the image National Geographic uses to gain readership for their article on Hurricane Sandy and her effects on boardwalks is pretty graphic. By showing a half-washed away boardwalk, it makes the structures look too fragile. But then, photos can’t lie. Or can they?

- Alana

Best to our class and their family and friends who may have been affected by this incredible storm.

The World is Too Hot!

Fossils on Fossils on Fossils

After reading an article about a past era of overheating and mass extinction, Xue and I were afraid of the future of the world, but also inspired. We wrote some limericks for your enjoyment about global warming and environmental conservation and stewardship. The article should receive more attention overall, since it shows that global warming is not a one-time result of our mistakes but rather a cyclical event that could happen again if no major change is made. We hate to get too preachy about the environment, but it's really a problem that deserves a lot of recognition and action. Do something!

Since magazine and newspaper articles tend to have very formulaic and structured ways of talking about discoveries and events, we decided to break from that norm. Even though we're blogging about magazines and newspapers and aren't limited by their structures, we want to provide our readers with responses that truly discuss the meat of the articles. However, everyone needs a break from academia at times and we figured this article could benefit from some creative reactions.

Long, long ago, the earth became too hot
Life died out like in a giant soup pot
Now the earth has regrown
Many new seeds were sown
If we don’t act now the world could be for not
-Ariel

At the end-Permian event
Everything got too hot when the CO2 was spent
By studying tiny fossils found in the southern China sea
Researchers found that temperatures reached 104 degrees
So we need to remember this Earth is only for rent
-Xue

World Chompion Group Post

We wanted to create a group post in order to better understand different perspectives. By writing from different points of view, and not discussing the article "The Tyrannosaurus Rex’s Dangerous and Deadly Bite" beforehand, or what we were writing, we came up with four different 100 word observations on one Smithsonian article. By limiting ourselves to only 100 words, we parsed down what we each got out of the article to show how we each individually understood it. Enjoy!

We’ve all seen caricatures of a T. rex with a huge body and head with tiny arms, but this article shows that these massive dinosaurs are not to be messed with. A T. rex theoretically can bite another T. rex in half or mangle it. Today, people flock to museums to see skeletons of the T. rex to appreciate their size and mock their disproportion. Since cloning technologies are being developed, I began to wonder what would happen if a T. rex was reanimated. Certainly it would first devour anyone who teases its awkward size, but what would be next? -Ariel

Smithsonian, like National Geographic, has a pretty superb reputation. They are often viewed as an expert source for archaeological news. Maybe that is why the T. rex’s reputation is so bad: because the science backs it up. As one of their recent articles highlights, a digital model of a T. rex’s skull shows how its bite is a lot stronger than previously assumed. The results showed that the maximum bite force was almost 12,800 pounds, the exact weight of the Apollo Command Module. So pretty heavy. Smithsonian isn’t beating around the bush with how badass the T. rex really was. -Alana

First to catch my eye are the ferocious fangs of T. rex. Imagery is incredibly important in magazines and can pull readers in with a single photograph. This article discussed the biomechanics of the “Bite power” of the infamous Tyrannosaurus rex. The author compared the T. rex’s jaw force of 12,800 pounds to “13 Steinway Model D concert grand pianos.” For those less musically inclined readers, this comparison will most likely alienate them, adding confusion to a seemingly simple subject. Over all this article was relatively well written, yet the analogies seemed strange and boring to me. -Jessie

I would never have believed that there are experts who spend time assessing the strength of dinosaurs’ bites. I cannot see the benefit in having this knowledge. It is interesting but overall useless. A biomechanics expert and a paleontologist worked together to figure that a T. rex named Stan (why do they name dinosaurs?) bit his prey with a maximum bite force of 12,800 pounds. They based their research on birds, which are living dinosaurs (so dinosaurs are not extinct?) and crocodilians, the closest living cousins to Dinosauria. Calculations and explanations for how they came to this conclusion are excluded. -Xue

Photo from http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/The-Tyrannosaurus-Rexs-Dangerous-and-Deadly-Bite-169806936.html#