Julia Litz Portfolio

Contents
Resume

Letters of Recommendation

Creative Communications Samples

Writing Sample

2
Resume

3
 Julia Litz
Jlitz2@illinois.edu
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Science in Advertising Expected May, 2010
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
GPA 3.4/4.0
Minor in English
WORK HISTORY
National Council of Jewish Women May, 2008 – August 2008
Public Relations and Marketing Intern
Wrote press releases, media alerts, and articles for the bi-monthly newsletter
Collaborated in set-up, execution, and break down of Back To School Store event
Organized donor and recipient lists for Back to School Store event
Nordstrom, St. Louis, MO May, 2007 – August, 2007
Support Staff
Completed various administrative tasks in two different departments
Folded and organized merchandise in stock room
Performed phone, internet, and in-store transactions using a cash register
Forever 21, St. Louis, MO May, 2006 – August, 2006
Sales Associate
Worked with customers in the dressing room and at the front of the store
Organized merchandise throughout the store
Supported managers when selecting sale merchandise by finding and retagging merchandise
ACTIVITIES/INVOLVMENT
Illio Yearbook September, 2008 – Present
Staff Writer
Compose articles for Events, Features, and News sections, most notably an article about technology on campus
Interview members of student body, faculty and staff to gain insight for articles
The Daily Illini September, 2008 – Present
Copy Editor
Create headlines for news, features, and sports articles
Check names and positions mentioned in articles to ensure accuracy
Edit copy for clarity and accuracy by using the Associated Press Style Guide
Member, Alpha Epsilon Phi Sorority September, 2006 – Present
Assistant VP Recruitment: Supported Recruitment Chairs by organizing members and materials before and after Formal
Recruitment
University of Illinois Panhellenic Council August, 2008 – September, 2008
Gamma Chi Recruitment Counselor
Led group of sixty undergraduate University of Illinois Formal Recruitment
Utilized learned counseling techniques whenever women were unsure about the process
Tutor, Thomas Paine Elementary School February, 2007 – December, 2007
Aided small groups of second grade students with reading and language arts assignments
Assisted students with homework in all subjects

4
Letters of Recommendations

5
6
7
Creative Communication Samples

8
9
10
11
12
13
Writing Samples

14
 With the popularity of 24-hour news channels, political talk shows, and even fake news it’s
easy to get lost in a sea of information. With the presidential election only months away,
NCJW-St. Louis is planning an Election Education Series Set, aimed to educate, inform,
and interest members. All events are free, but we ask that any interested participant sign
up online at ncjwstl.org or call the office.
The first event on July 16 will feature Senator Jeff Smith, who will lead a discussion
about leadership and power in government. He also will explain the responsibilities of the
Speaker of The House, Majority and Minority Leaders, State Representatives, Congress-
man, and Senators in both Washington and Jefferson City. Smith is the Missouri State
Senator for the fourth district in St. Louis City and also teaches political science at Washing-
ton University.
On August 20, Steve Sorkin, an advocacy and community relation’s consultant for
nonprofit organizations, will facilitate a discussion about he various partied in our political
system. He will provide information about the Electoral Collage, delegates, caucuses and
the voting process. Marlene Hammerman will introduce an NCJW national initiative,
“Promote the Vote- Protect the Vote.”
Judge Patricia Cohen will educate NCJW members about the President’s influence
on the Supreme Court on September 17. She will discuss the importance of district and ap-
pellate courts as well as jurisdiction and the court of last resort. Cohen serves as the Chief
Judge of the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District.

15
 A Lack of Public Relations in the Case of Trans World Airlines Flight 800

On July 17, 1996, Trans World Airlines (TWA) Flight 800 took off from John F. Kennedy

International Airport. The flight was on its way to Rome, Italy with a stop in Paris, France at

Charles De Gaulle Airport. Thirteen minutes after taking off, the plane exploded in the air,

crashing in to the Atlantic Ocean near East Moriches, New York. None of the 230 passengers

on board survived. Witnesses to the crash reported, “that they saw and/or heard explosions,

accompanied by a large fireball over the ocean, and observed debris, some of which was burn-

ing, falling to the water” (National Transportation Safety Board, 1996). From the moment word

of the crash hit the news, rumors about the cause of the explosion began to circulate. Some

believed that terrorists had planted a bomb or that a missile struck the plane in midair. Addi-

tionally, theories about a mechanical failure also began to swirl around the case (Reid, 2006).

It took over four years for the Nation Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to conclude their in-

vestigation into the cause of the explosion. “The National Transportation Safety Board deter-

mines that the probable cause of the TWA flight 800 accident was an explosion of the center

wing fuel tank (CWT), resulting from ignition of the flammable fuel/air mixture in the

tank” (National Transportation Safety Board, 1996). The report went on to explain that there

was most likely a short circuit outside of the center wing fuel tank.

When the event occurred, the media covered the case as they would any other

16
 When the event occurred, the media covered the case as they would any other

story. In the news reports, victims were named and officials on the scenes provided details.

As time progressed, however, the media wanted to know why the explosion occurred. Only

two days after Flight 800 exploded, news sources began to report that theories were being

investigated. On July 19, The Washington Post ran a story with the headline “Crash Probe

Considers Sabotage.” Less than a month after the crash occurred, CNN published the arti-

cle, “Bomb Still Leading Theory in TWA Crash.” The article stated that “although the lead-

ing theory is that a bomb was in the cargo hold, investigators also speculate that a bomb

could have been placed in the nose wheel, or in a food cart in the front upper section of the

jetliner, the source said…Authorities have not ruled out the possibility that a missile or me-

chanical malfunction could have brought down the plane” (Holliman, 1996). It was not until

months after the explosion, however, that the media began to report on what has now been

determined as the real cause of the explosion. Reports were no long concerned with con-

spiracy theories. Instead they began to focus on hard evidence. In December 2007, the

missile theory came back in to play with an article in Aviation Week and Space Technology.

In the article, James McKenna reported that “according to individuals familiar with

17
 the investigation and the reports, no evidence has been found to indicate that the explosion

was triggered by an external event such as a bomb, a missile strike or other, more unlikely

scenarios. That has led investigators to search for ignition sources in or around the center

tank. TWA officials are questioning that focus. ‘We are not convinced there was a sponta-

neous explosion in the center tank,' said Mark Abels, TWA's vice-president of corporate

communications. ‘We won't be until there is an ignition source identified and there is proof it

set off the explosion’” (McKenna, 1997). This uncertainty had a pronounced effect on the

investigation and public image of TWA.

The organizations involved in the explosion of Flight 800 were the NTSB, TWA, Boe-

ing, the FBI, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA and Boeing came un-

der fire for not moving quickly enough to respond to the mechanical issues believed to be

involved with the crash. In 1997, The Washington Post ran an article with the headline

“NTSB Frustrated With FAA Response.” It wasn’t until 2008, twelve years after the explo-

sion, that Newsday.com reported that a new FAA rule would require “equipment that would

render harmless the potentially explosive vapors in near-empty fuel tanks” (Valenti, 2008).

These vapors were found to be a factor in the explosion of Flight 800. Later in the article,

18
 the views of the victim’s families were openly explained. "‘We put a man on the moon faster

than they can make a decision to protect the flying public,’ said John Seaman, chairman of

the Families of TWA Flight 800 Association” (Valenti). A Singapore paper, The Straits

Times, also did not look favorably on Boeing’s response to the crash. On July 26, the pa-

per reported that Boeing, which made the plane, was not forthcoming in mentioning the

crash on their website. “From the time of the crash to last night, the contents of the Boeing

home page consisted essentially of an Airline Image Survey ‘to estimate the effect air-

planes have on your image of an airline’, a section called Boeing Fun Facts and another on

job vacancies” (Jansen, 1996). Media coverage of this incident also showed a lack of fo-

cus by the investigators involved in this case. Many involved with the case found the FBI’s

response to be slow and often nonsensical. “Federal law enforcement officials from the

FBI had arrived on the scene first and imposed their own rules on gathering evidence that

were consistent with the bureau's secretive, authoritative style. NTSB officials now say that

the arrangement hindered that accident probe, keeping alive FBI theories that a bomb

caused the crash when an explosion in the center fuel tank actually brought the jet down.

19
 Complaints about the FBI led to congressional hearings alleging bureau miscon-

duct” (Levin & Johnson, 1999). The lack of unity between the two groups caused more

trouble within the case and slowed down the response. If the two had worked together

to gather evidence and disseminate information to the public, there could have been

fewer questions and rumors. There was also a great deal of tension between the

NTSB and the FAA. “Calling the FAA's response ‘unacceptable,’ National Transporta-

tion Safety Board Chairman Jim Hall wrote that he was ‘disappointed by the FAA's re-

sponse to safety recommendations . . . that would reduce the potential for explosive

fuel-air mixtures in fuel tanks’” (Rashbaum & Siemaszko, 1997). All of the tension be-

tween the organizations involved with the explosion shows the effect of miscommunica-

tion. Had all of the groups worked together, there may have been more answers for the

families of the victims.

The FBI, NTSB, FAA, TWA and Boeing all had a hand in this poorly executed

investigation. To start with, all of these organizations should have banded together and

cooperated with each other’s efforts. The leader of each group should have met to-

gether and drafted some sort of plan of action in order to address the situation. They

20
also could have set up an umbrella organization in which each group that could have pooled

their information together. This way, there would be one news source for the incident rather

than a bunch of organizations releasing independent information at the same time. The fact

that they could not work together did not inspire confidence from the victim’s families. Peo-

ple were looking for answers and none of these groups could step up to the plate and pro-

vide concrete facts. Because there was a lack of reliable information involving the case,

rumors began to swirl and the mainstream media paid more attention to that information

than the evidence that was continually being discovered. Also, a cornerstone of public rela-

tions is keeping the public aware of the facts. In the case of TWA Flight 800, there was so

much misinformation perpetuated back in forth by different organizations that there were not

any viable leads for the public to go on. The media began to report on rumors and none of

the organizations intervened, which showed just how disorganized the process was. At a

minimum, all of the organizations should not have allowed their disagreements over the

cause of the explosion to play out in the press. In the end, each group did a poor job of dis-

seminating information and providing solid public relations. None of these organizations

could be considered innocent and the legacy of the investigation will endure for the con-

fused, misinformed families of the victims.

21