Author Archives: Dana Jennings

HTML is like jumping off of a cliff: jumping without learning how is going to hurt your head

I am really starting to like the Codecademy tutorials. Even though they are novice at first, and many people already have a basic understanding of code, the first lessons help reinforce the idea that repetition is the best way to learn. I think that most people see coding and programming as some ethereal skill that only geniuses possess and that the language is unlearn-able for the masses. They are wrong, but as long as the myth persists and people stay unaware of some of the simplicity, they will always need others to do even basic coding.

I wish that the tutorials would go back to the basics every now and again, however, as I learn a lot through repetition. I liked that they made us do the basic <!DOCTYPE html> on the second go around, but after that they just assumed that you will remember it. Maybe if once a month they force you to redo an early tutorial or something of that sorts would keep people up-to-date. I don’t mean people that code for a living, but more like journalist and other people delving into coding to help enhance their main career.

I think that journalists can really make coding a part of their vernacular. We are expected to be masters of our language (even if we aren’t!) and having an understanding of coding will help us stay competitive in an era in which computers are becoming more and more of a necessary tool, rather than a luxury. All of the major publications have internet heavy platforms that really make the news reporting field infinitely better. As journalists, if we can’t understand how the news is delivered from us to our audience, I think that we are losing out on a great opportunity to make our product better. We should be well-versed in HTML and CSS because it is now a part of our craft, whether we wanted it to be or not. Thankfully, I enjoy it!

Let’s get started with “Getting Started” and others

In the readings for this week, I was really enthusiastic about how hands-on the material is getting. I like the ideas that were presented because it relates my experience of writing with the experience I have from COBOL. Until now, they have been exclusive from each other; I can write well and I can code COBOL well, but I never really felt that they were similar or connected. Now I can see how the coding can be seen as writing, rather than my original belief that it is only mathematical at heart.

I love how McAdams talked about why she started with HTML and CSS instead of other programming that is more “program-y” and made the case that writers will see it as closer to their craft. I agree wholeheartedly, as I view pure coding as a puzzle, with logic, math, and a solution. The HTML and CSS works more like a foreign language that can be manipulated once you understand the syntax.

I really liked Ethan Marcotte’s piece on responsive web design, and I thought that he was very good at relaying information in an engaging way. I wanted to read more of his writing, and his book looks very informative, but I don’t think I would buy it because I expect to find all of that information from other sources. I thought the way that he described the process was well done, but when he added examples of what he was doing, piece by piece, made it incredibly more understandable. I also think he is funny because he wants to be an unstoppable robot ninja.

The slide show about the analogy of web design wasn’t as helpful to me, but I think that this was partly because you have already gone over the house analogy. The preceding list was really helpful though, as it brought the reasoning behind learning this stuff straight to the front.

Laws of the internet

I thought the readings were very helpful, and were able to teach both beginners and those who have more experience. The video of how the internet works was entertaining and it made me think about how the vast majority of people view it as an “omni-present cloud” that simply exists outside of normal laws of physics. It reminded me of how many people view the media as some intractable machine bent upon feeding itself, rather than the public service many journalists are trying to provide.

Having some experience with programming, I had seen many of the “laws” given about programming in the workplace. I thought they were funny at many times, and unfortunately violated quite often in the corporate workplace (which is another viewpoint of people seeing something as a machine rather than a helpful tool). I had never thought to compare those rules to my writing as a journalist, but unconsciously I think that I did regardless. One of the hardest to follow for me is: simple is better than complex.

I like the idea of thinking like a programmer in our journalistic writing, as that is the background for much of my thinking. I am the son of two programmers, and therefore I find programming logic to be, well, logical. I want to delve into the guts of some programming languages, because I am always interested in learning something new about computers. I think that we can always make the languages more efficient and more dynamic, and that means that we should always be learning and adapting to new advances. It is also imperative, to me at least, to know where the origin of these languages and computers came from. The history of it is the basis for how we learn what mistakes we made and what to avoid in the future. I think this also applies to journalism, and writing in general. We should always be striving to write better; to report better; to investigate better. If we don’t learn as we go, we will get left behind.