Real life journalism

This semester we have talked a lot about the public's right to know and the right to privacy. Also, about what to publish and what not to publish. On Wednesday, in the Maitland Mercury and the Newcastle Herald - there was the perfect example.

Both newspapers covered the funeral of Brendan Allwood, the 23-year-old apprentice plumber who was tragically electrocuted at work last week. His actions saved the life of his boss and good mate Aaron Watt (pictured below).

For the Allwood's it was a double blow. They had lost their husband and father less than five years earlier.

The main issue here is the photographs. Above, are two images, which were both used by both publications. The one on the left of Brendan's mother, girlfriend (left) and sister (right) was blown up on the Mercury's front cover. The one on the right, of Brendan's mother leaning on Brendan's girlfriend's sholdour, was used on the front by the Herald.

It caused many heated discussions around the Mercury office the next day. All the ladies in accounts were blowing up saying the image used by the Mercury was inappropriate and as mothers, they empathised with the griefing mother. They felt the image was to raw and the picture (above right) would have been the better choice.

I agreed.

On the other hand, the Mercury's front cover did show the grief, although graphically, and the family had asked the newspaper to be there.

But more importantly, if you were the editor/photographer/ journalist, and you had to make the decision, what would you do?

This is a real life scenario in a community newspaper close to home with real consequences, and you have to consider not only the paper, but the people. No text books now!

Here is the link to the online article - Woody funeral.

Photos by Cath Bowen and published on the Maitland Mercury website.

Bolts stops the clock - and Kingston murders

I am not normally one for sports and political pedestals but Usain Bolt, the Beijing Olympics triple gold medalist, made a fair point the other day.

I was reading a sports brief in The Daily Telegraph earlier this week and after winning some form of world sports award, Bolt had a message to send his countrymen that went a little like this: Me and my fellow athletes have done a good job and we are trying to promote Jamacia, so stop killing each other.

According to this article called "Usain Bolt offers hope to Jamaicia's troubled society" written by Jenny McAsey (heraldsun.com.au, August 22, 2008), 1500 Jamacians were murdered last year and 270 were gunned down by police.

"USAIN Bolt has revolutionised sprinting but his record-breaking deeds have an even greater power to change the crime-ridden youth culture that is threatening to destroy Jamaican society," McAsey wrote in her lead paragraph.

This was backed up by Owen Slot who wrote for the Times Online on September 9 this year, "That is the effect that the Olympics had on Jamaica. Barbara Blake Hannah, a special consultant to the Ministry of Information, Culture and Sports, said: 'Sports is one thing that holds Jamaica together. I heard that on the day of Bolt's 100 metres, no one here was killed. Even murder took a holiday for him'."

It shouldn't take an Olympic champion to stop murder but good on ya' Usain Bolt - for your incredible deeds on the track and for speaking up off it when your country was in desperate need.

QLD police investigate journalists

Check out this press release I received from the MEAA today.

It ties right in with the privacy and law issues we have been dealing with in class.

Click here to see the story.

Online: a 'new' journalism, content and the rule of the search engine

The two presentations in class today were very informative.

Firstly, Lauren Carter outlined the advent of online media, compared it to traditional journalism and then examined its reliability.

"I mentioned before how one of the major advantages of online journalism is it's immediacy, and this begs the question of what exactly are we giving up in return for instant information gratification - and the answer given by many web journalism critics is accuracy and depth," Ms Carter said.

"Online journalism prides itself on delivering the latest breaking news first, but technology means that misinformation can spread immediately as well."

On the website Web Aware, an article about misinformation online is posted, "Unfortunately, the Internet also contains a great deal of information that is neither valuable nor reliable. Since anyone can post comments or information on the Internet, users need to develop critical thinking skills to judge the accuracy of online information".

"Traditionally, printed resources have had gatekeepers - editors, proofreaders and fact checkers - to weed out mistakes, lies and inaccurate information. However, the Internet, in many cases, has no safety guards."

Like Web Aware pointed out, these gatekeepers have traditionally been in printed material. Now newspapers are declining in an era that has already converged and is becoming more and more reliant on the World Wide Web for its news.

"The convergence of communications and information technologies (CIT), the growth of on-line media, and the relative decline of both print and broadcast news journalism in Australia have encouraged prophetic statements about the future - or lack thereof - of the 'traditional' news media," Suellen Tapsall said in chapter 15, The Media is the Message (235).

While many people are calling the death of newspapers, Fidler says he has heard it all before, "Of course, this isn't the first time the pundits have written obituaries for newspapers. In the 1950s and 60s most of them were convinced that television would be the death of newspapers, and in the 70s and early 80s it was videotext. In each case, technology and economics were thought to favour electronic media. Yet far from killing them, new technologies actually helped to save newspapers and make them even more profitable. Now the pundits are wringing their hands again (Fidler in Tapsall, 237)."

I definately agree with Fidler. I do not believe that traditional news media will die with the advent of online journalism. I believe there will be an increase in convergence, which does demonstrate a bit of technological determinism, but I do not think newspapers will die.

What do you think? Will online journalism overtake traditional media formats?

You can participate in the exclusive online poll to the right of my home page as well. You have until the end of semester to participate.

The second presentation today was delivered by Amy Wilkinson and she concentrated on search engine optimisation (SEO). It cause quite a stir in class and it was a new term for me but I think I was aware of it already, without knowing exactly what it was called. And really, it makes sense, to attempt and maximise the hits on your web site by tailoring content and repeating words. There are millions of websites in cyber space and effective use of SEO makes it possible for yours to be found by the punters at home, work or play.

I think it opens itself up by dodgy back door deals with big companies like Google, but that is probably another issue all together.

Rather than a Josh Callinan conspiracy theory, I will allow Tapsall to have the last say on this blog topic: "The continued success of a medium-diverse journalism will certainly require news organisations to identify their niche and build on the strengths of their medium. More importantly, it will require a willingness to look beyond the technological determinist visionaries and doomsayers to consider strategically and realistically the promises and challenges posed by technology and convergence (252)."

"Shiver me timbers!"

Today is the 14th annual International Talk Like A Pirate Day. Grab your rum, put on your hat and sail away across the seven seas to find your buried treasure. Or click here for bit more on the day's origins and a couple of useful sayings.

Moral minefields: legal and ethical dilemas

Mark Pearson's opening words of Chapter 13, A Question of Legality, describes this weeks topic very well.

"The journalist's relationship with the law is occasionally precarious, sometimes liberating, usually comfortable, and almost always negotiable. It ranges across this terrain because it involves the balance of rights and responsibilities in a complex, ever-changing social climate (198)."

In today's presentation Eben Foster also quoted Pearson, this time in regards to the relationship between the law and journalists: "a two headed beast or double-edged sword with each competitively fighting for the interests of the public."

But more interestingly again was this Pearson quote, again used by Eben today: "Journalists have no rights beyond those of ordinary citizens, although they are given some special privileges in order to faciltate their roles in bringing information to the wider citizenery."

At first thought, this seems utterly ridiculous, but on closer inspection it is also fair. The above summation is right in my eyes. Journalists are the same as ordinary citizens but they do need some help in getting that information quickly and accurately into the public sphere.

One thing, which has put to rest, not completely, the notion of reporting without fear or favour, is the era of litigation, suing and passing blame. It has also worked to the detriment of sources providing useful information as well.

"More and more, legal considerations are influencing, if not determining, day-to-day decisions in the media," according to the Cyber College website.

It describes many situations, which can potentially lead to hefty law suits, including: a TV news report quoting a police officer about a drunk driver who caused a fatal accident; a photo from a web page used in a student newspaper; and a mistake that associated the wrong name or home address with criminal wrongdoing.

A closer examination of this topic highlights the many day to day considerations individual journalists and media organisations face each and every day.

Pearson also deals with subjudice, defamation, freedom of information and the public interest defence, in chapter 13.

The most recent example of this is the current Brisbane Broncos sexual assault drama in the middle of their NRL finals campaign. A report released on heraldsun.com.au reveals a fourth player has been linked to the allegations. Click here for more.

This comes on the back of other legal cases this rugby league season including Cronulla five-eighth Greg Bird, Canberra halfback Todd Carney and Gold Coast Titans forward Anthony Laffranchi.

Should they be named straight away? What rights do journalists have in these situations?

I know I faced this immediately after the Bird drama broke and I saw him out on the beers in Maitland. It was only one week on and I just did not know what to do. Should I report it, should I talk to him, should I just let it go? What's legal? What's moral? What's ethical? What a minefield!

Any thoughts?

The day we die?

Came across this bizarre article on the SMH site tonight called, The Day We All Die: September 10, 2008.

"So, Buzzketeers, on September 10, do your best to protect yourself from the everyday dangers of existence. Wrap your head in packing foam, fill your tummy with starch-based peanuts, and keep yourself wet and/or naked to prevent sparks catching in your clothing and hair, because you probably won’t want to miss what’s coming out of the LHC."

Read more by clicking on the link above.

See you all next week - I think?

In the public interest: public V private

It is almost the crux of journalism itself. Public V private. To report or not to report? What's right and what's wrong. Where is the line drawn and why?

The MEAA provide a Code of Ethics for journalists but as Luke Coates pointed out in today's presentation, he sees them as a "useless wank".

"They sound nice but these guidelines effectively mean nothing," Mr Coates said.

"They are a useless wank."

In this week's reading (Chapter 12: Public Interest, Private Lives) Ian Richards does not quite go that far but he does criticise the code.

"While many have disputed this interpretation even the many journalists who base their ethical approach on it would have difficulty applying such provisions because they are so vaguely worded (191, Richards)."

I suppose this is partly due to the fact that the media needs guidelines, not rules, so they can bend them when they see fit. Maybe a bit harsh but take the recent Australian Law Reform Commission's massive report on privacy and The Australian's Media section comment.

"'Privacy threat to celebrity coverage' was the headline in the Media supplement of The Australian on July 31 for its lead story, which began: 'The celebrity media industry could be thrown into turmoil by moves to restrict reporting on public figures'," wrote Matthew Ricketson in Privacy Debate Needs a Wider Focus (theage.com.au, August 13, 2008).

Furthermore, Ricketson reflects, "Public cynicism about the news media is already widespread; the pity is that the concerns expressed by the Right to Know coalition about the proposed law against invasion of privacy are, in many ways, valid".

This moves into the definition of news itself and the move towards celebrity driven news both online and in newspapers themselves.

Take the reporting of triple gold medalist Stephanie Rice (pictured) by nineMSN after her swimming commitments in Beijing. The Michael Phelps kiss issue, the break with fellow Aussie swimmer Eamon Sullivan and her every party move. Is this right? Even prior to the games when she was caught in that police uniform through Facebook photos. Is this right? Actually, is it right that I have used the image again? Isn't that just as bad (Even though it was three of the first five Goggle images that appeared)?

But this is another issue all together.

"Balancing the public interest with people's right to privacy is a complex issue, and those in newsrooms know sometimes wrong decisions are made," Ricketson writes.

Richards concludes, "In short, the debate over media intrusion into individual privacy is far from over."

These concluding points are very true. The public V private issue is a difficult one and it is far from over. And this will continue to be the case regardless of what technology or format journalists are working with.

Any thoughts?

Sarah Palin?

A valuable lesson for all those in the media industry. Google is not God! Check out the fatal mistake by an SBS newsreader in regards to Alaska Governor Sarah Palin last week, as pointed out by Media Watch last night. 

Has the media become too dependent on the internet, and in particular search engines such as Google, to source information?

Inspiring sports stories

Still on sport and I have seen some of the most inspiring sports stories broadcast over the last two days. 

Firstly, Australian Story provided an unbelievable insight into the world of John McLean (pictured), who is going for gold in mixed rowing at the Beijing Paralympics tomorrow. But that is the icing on the cake for McLean who has already completed three Hawaiian Ironman's and swam the English Channel, all after being hit by a truck in a cycling accident, which left him unable to walk. The production itself was timely and well constructed/organised. Interviews with John, his father, his friend, doctors and fellow athletes provided an in depth account.

60 minutes the night before was not quite as in depth but still very emotive and inspiring. Peter Overton's report concentrated on runner Kelly Cartwright and McLean's rowing partner Kelly Ross.

Sensational stuff!

Do you agree or are these stories just overplayed and over emotive?

Toyota feeling for Williams

Old Ken "Blue eyes" Sutcliffe proved he still has what it takes in the world of sports reporting when he described Serena Williams post US Open jumping fit on Channel Nine news using a golden piece of Australian terminology: "Oh What a feeling!"

Cliche or clever?

Can you handle the truth?

I can't help it. Every time I hear a line similar, actually, that's a lie in itself, every time I hear the word truth it immediately takes me to this scene of this movie. I suppose this is helped by the fact I have watched A Few Good Men a few times, actually that is a lie to, every time it is on the television I feel compelled to watch it. I just can't take my eyes off it. The plot thickens, I pretend to be surprised but I'm always genuinely excited. Then it comes, after all the tension and the build up - the infamous scene, an explosion of passion and those magical movie lines. "I want the truth," a fresh faced Tom Cruise demands, "You can't handle the truth!" replies the man himself, Jack Nicholson.

I may have digressed slightly, but not completely from this weeks chapters by Sharon Tickle (Chapter 6 - The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but...) and the combined efforts of Leo Bowman and former Newcastle University journalism teacher Steve Mcilwaine (Chapter 7 - The importance of enquiry).

Firstly, to Tickle and a few points that I found interesting:

• The public perception of journalism, "Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story," against the MEAA Code of Ethics, "Respect for truth and the public's right to information are fundamental principles of journalism". Tickle concludes, "Between these two extremes lies the everyday reality of the working journalist," and she names issues such as time pressures, market forces, law, work culture, human frailty and experience, as issues that shape this reality.
• An historical overview of truth in society from Plato to Foucault and from Aristotle to Friedrich Nietzsche.
  
• Reasoning and judgment, more specifically, deductive reasoning (general principles related to specific fates) and inductive reasoning (specific facts related to general principles).
• Case studies such as: Stephen Glass (New Republic), Jonathon Broder (Chicago Tribune), and Matt Drudge (Drudge Report), which highlight how journalists have manipulated the truth by either plagiarism or making up stories, quotes and sources.
• "Journalists are doing more with less".
• "The day has already arrived when an individual can be handed a backpack and told to 'go get the story' anywhere in the world or in near space. The backpack would contain a mobile phone, a laptop computer, a hand-helddigi-cam, a passport, and a credit card. The new breed of all-in-one digital journalist will cover breaking news stories, acting as a journalist-editor-camera-operator-sound recorder-video-editor-presenter. Whether the beat is Kabul or Canberra, the cyber journalist will be a one-person shoot-show-and-tell."
• The statement, "...print will never die".
• And three things journalists will ignore at their "peril":
• "Don't believe anything you hear or read until it has been independently verified by the most authoritative sources possible."
• "There are many sides to a story as there are people who want to tell it."
• "There will always be someone who knows more about a subject than you do.

Secondly, to Bowman and McIlwaine, and the three stages of reporting:

• "To meet audience needs, the news-gathering process should always seek to encompass three levels of reporting, not one or two, as is conventionally accepted.
• Level 1: Reactive (immediate, sources)
  
• Level 2: Analytic (how and why)
  
• Level 3: Reflective (deeper, social trends)
• Bowman and McIlwaine use the 1996 Port Arthur massacre as an example. Level 1 was a report of the event itself. Level 2 was further questions like why a former psychiatrically disturbed person could have access to a firearm. Level 3 was a review of the gun culture in Australia and finished with the federal government imposing new laws.
  
• A more recent local example would be the 2007 June long weekend storms and floods in Newcastle and the Hunter. It started as a report of the events like the shipwrecked Pasher Bulka, the worst storm to hit Newcastle in 30 years and worst floods in Maitland since 1977. Level 2 reporting looked at how and why these storms and floods occurred by talking to the ship's skipper, meteorologists about weather patterns, and investigating the levee bank gates. Level 3 looked at the storms and floods in a historical context (frequency and patterns), the way Newcastle infrastructure handled the disaster and the Hunter's flood mitigation system.
• "The three-level system of enquiry encourages journalists to seek and explore the countless stories that await telling. It is a simple, sound technique for journalists at all stages of their careers and in all kinds of news outlets."
  

Finally, to see the infamous lines from A Few Good Men visit the You Tube site via this TRUTH link.

Churnalism

It may be cynical and a little bit dark but unfortunately Nick Davies is telling the truth. News rooms get press releases and journalists on the daily grind simply churn it out for the next deadline. Sad but true.

The interview he did with Kerry O'Brien on the 7.30 report late last month highlights the difficulties facing the media industry the world over. Commercial interests mean increase profits for big business, which then leads to editorial job cuts, which then means more work to be done by less people. Bottom line - more pressure on individuals and less quality.

What made it even more poignant was the fact Fairfax had just announced massive job cuts (see previous post). Funny in a way but bloody scary for the Australian media industry.

Davies talks a lot about the print media but O'Brien asks him about the future of television and radio as well. The outlook is similarly concerning: "(It's) In the same kind of mess that the print media are in. There's no difference, I'm afraid, because news is expensive and unless we find a new financial model we won't be able to deliver it and I don't quite see where that new financial model is coming from and I don't know any media proprietor who can see it either. They're all very worried."

To read more of the interview or to see it online visit http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2348362.htm.

Furthermore, Davies has a new book out called Flat Earth News, which deals with various journalistic scandals across the globe.

Monday night ABC

Four Corners on Monday night covered an issue that I have been contemplating for quite some time. The dominance of Woolworths and Coles in Australia. These massive multi-million dollar companies who have effectively killed off the corner store, the local bottlo, and the good old fashioned service station. Together these two corporations control more than half of Australia's groceries, 60% of fresh produce (eg: fruit and vegetables) and 70% of dairy (eg: milk). Add to that enormous liquor chains like Dan Murphy's and Liquor Land, combined with more than 1100 petrol stations, and you have major monopolies controlling the majority of consumer Australia. And this does not even mention the hotels, pubs, poker machines, fast food outlets and variety stores also in their empires.

The report itself by Stephen Long was interesting and engaging. It talked to most of the relevant parties, such as the ACCC, Woolworths, retail analysts, farmers and independent bottle shop owners. It probably missed the petrol players and the sequence, or the flow, of the actual story was a little disjointed, but overall, it was worth watching. Click on the link to have a look at "The Price We Pay" yourself.

This was followed by Media Watch where Jonathon Holmes, in his regular sarcastic tone, targeted a Who mix up, whale sex identification, Fairfax job cuts and Lismore's Neil Marks running for Mayor. Another amusing and informative episode, which can be seen by clicking here.

Finally, to Andrew Denton and his excellent interviewing style and technique. From the comedy of Bill Bailey to the serious stories of three foster care parents. Wonderful stuff. More by clicking ... here.

A couple of things

First of all, the Fairfax strikes on the weekend signal a significant point in the Australian media industry. It has been widely reported that 550 people from the Fairfax group will lose their jobs. Almost 200 of them from editorial. Apparently, most of those 200 are production workers. Never the less, it poses an important question; is this the direct result of the media move online? This seems to be the case at the New York Times.

What affect does this have on the industry? MEAA federal secretary Chris Warren thinks it spells the decline of excellence. Read his thoughts here. But others, like Justin Peters at the Columbia Journalism Review, says there can be too many journalists at the one spot at the one time. These analysts show both the positive and the negative.

More immediately, what affect does this latest strike battle have on us, as journalism students moving into the world of journalism? Furthermore, do you agree with the strikes, or is it necessary to cut jobs and each person simply look after themsleves?

If you are looking at joining the media workforce check out the MEAA website and consider membership.

Lastly, for a bit of comic relief, check out Naomi Robson lose it on You Tube.

Today's presentation

After hearing Mitch's comments in class today about, "Who Will Pay For Journalism?", it really got me thinking. Not just in regards to the hilarious South Park clip he showed us but in regards to the media's future. He pointed out that no one really has the answers and no one really knows what will happen in the online world, especially in relation to funding journalism. Some of the possible solutions he pointed out were: subscriptions; good-willed donations; and advertising. Hybrid models seemed to be the most viable.

However, will it only be the major players, such as ninemsn, that thrive in this new media market? Will they become like the Woolworths of the online world, with a stronghold over consumers? Surely, alternative or niche markets will struggle to survive without mass support from the people because they will not have the required finances to be continually viable.

Or, like the clip we just watched from The Future of Journalism of Summit, will we, new journalists, have to run our own race, like our own personal business? Selling ourselves, our work and our news to the highest bidder. Is this a new thing? Or just an old thing with new media formats?

In the end, who will pay for journalism?

Australian media in 2012

Found this article over the weekend and thought it may be of interest to aspiring young journalists like ourselves. Matthew Ricketson from The Age newspaper talks about the face of journalism and the media in five years time.

"What this underscores is that traditional media companies ignore the power of the internet to transform the media at their peril. If they do, they risk repeating the error made by Sony. The powerhouse of the recorded music industry refused to forgo revenue from CD sales only to see a computer company, Apple, create a device (the iPod) that consumers took to like a cat to catnip."

Well put. Furthermore:

"By 2012, according to PricewaterhouseCoopers, the size of the internet market — and that includes revenue for internet service providers as well as advertising — will be $6.74 billion compared with the size of the newspaper market ($5.85 billion) and commercial free to air television ($4.17 billion)."

Interesting stats in an up-to-date piece written on August 20, 2008. To read more click here.

Who will pay for journalism?

"If advertising and journalism are forever linked we will not have a problem. However, I don't think it will be forever linked. All the trends are that the journalism and advertising are decoupling. So if advertising is no longer subsidising journalism, then what? Where will the money come from to pay journalists a decent, living wage?"

That is the million dollar question. I found this on a blog from the Public Journalism Network website. How will journalists be paid in an age of cyber-news? I then found one theory being tested: pay-per view journalism. This theory is outlined in Nicholas Carr's blog: Rough Type. He revealed that Steve Rubel from CNET is trialling the payment of bloggers based on the amount of page views they generate. Rubel is using this as a trial, which will probably take about a year, but Carr said it is "inevitable".

Carr continues by arguing that, "Online publishing breaks the old bundled-content model of print publishing". Furthermore, "Once content moves online, writers are no longer contributing to the overall value of a package - a newspaper or a magazine, say. Each of their stories becomes a discrete product." This is true. When you go online you can isolate a particular story. You do not have to open up to page 35 to read more. You go where you want to go. And page five does not necessarily follow on directly from page four. Consumers can flick from Stephanie Rice to Garfield and back to Iemma's power dilemma in an instant and in any particular order. This definitely breaks away from the traditional "package" and "bundle" model outlined by Carr. And it definitely highlights the need for pay-by-view journalism unless more advertising is directed online. Whether or not this is the best model, I am unsure, but at least it provides a way to fund journalism, at least online journalism, into the future.

Any thoughts?

Dream Team

If I hear the men's basketball from the USA team referred to as The Dream Team one more time I am going to absolutely lose it. Whether it is a commentater, the news reader or my mate down the street - there is sure to be kicking and screaming, bricks through windows and probably car alarms wailing in the background as sweat drips from my brow and my muscles twitch with anger.

The fact of the matter is this: the men's basketball team from the US of A currently competing at the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games is not The Dream Team.

It's as simple as that. End of story. There ain't nothing more to it.

The Dream Team (pictured) was the US basketball team from the 1992 Barcelona Olympics with superstars like Charles Barkley, Patrick Ewing, Magic Johnson, Scottie Pippen and Michael Jordan.

Now, I'm not inferring that the 2008 team has not got big names, Lebron James and Kobe Bryant put that argument to rest immediately. But they are not part of The Dream Team.

Yet, idiotic people in the media keep calling them The Dream Team.

In Australia, it would be like calling Ricky Ponting's men of 2008 The Invincibles. The fact is, we all know The Invincibles were the Australian cricket team that toured England and remained undefeated in 1948. The Invincibles tag only refers to that particular team. It is the same for The Dream Team.

But as soon as an American basketball team takes the court, especially when the Boomers played them in the quarter finals last night (The Aussies were heavily defeated by 116-85), they get called The Dream Team.

However, according to Wikipedia, there have been some US basketball squads after the original Dream Team was assembled in 1992, that have been labelled as Dream Team II or the like. But it just ain't the same and at the end of the day - there is only one Dream Team.

Presentation

I delivered my seminar today and it went a little better than I expected. Everyone in the class had something to say at some point and although I made a couple of mistakes it seemed to go fairly smoothly.

But it was a survey of the class that I conducted early in my seminar that raised the most interesting information. To highlight the globalisation V localisation topic, I asked the people in my class whether or not they were on facebook. About 75% of the class raised their hands. I then asked the class whether or not they knew their next door neighbour. About 50% of the class raised their hands. While the difference in the response was not massive, and with the test not being the greatest, it still showcased the move of society, especially younger people to the globalised community, rather than the local community. The fact that more people were willing to share information to anyone across the world online, than to know the name of the person next door, signifies some sort of trend from the pre-Internet era.

Also, a quick show of hands revealed that most people in the 3-5pm Journalism class believe newspapers, especially local publications like the Maitland Mercury, will survive because of the publics thirst for local content.

Journalism in the global village

One of the first points that Rhonda Breit makes in her chapter "Journalism in the global village" (Tapsall and Varley, 2001) is one of the most poignant for the chapter. "The media revolution talked about in this book, has created an environment of uncertainty for journalists struggling to keep pace with changing technology and work practices." This uncertainty can be heard amidst Communications students of this very University as they struggle to come to grips with the industry they aspire to and its rapidly changing face.

And when I say rapid, I mean rapid. Take ABC online for example (I know I have referred to this website in earlier blogs but I think it best exemplifies the convergence of media). In 1995 the ABC established a multimedia unit. In 2000 it was called the New Media division. This changed to New Media and Digital Services the following year. Podcasts were then introduced in the lead up to Christmas, 2004. Less than two years on, the ABC were seen as the international leader of podcast programs with over 50 available online. In 2007, the New Media and Digital Services department was dissolved and divided up. A new Innovations area was created and they currently maintain the website and deal with any new media technologies. So, within 15 years, the advancement of technology has taken journalism to another place.

Has it tapped into the world of public journalism? If the DVD (watched in class the on August 13) produced by 1233 ABC Newcastle using the photographs of civilians documenting the 2007 June long weekend storms and floods around Newcastle and the Hunter is anything to go by - then the answer would be yes.

However, has this online era really given the people a voice?

"Technology has given the media a global audience and strategic alliances are giving the media power, but this has not created a global voice," according to Breit.

What Breit is most concerned about is the power of the giant Trans National Corporations (TNC's) such as, News Corp (Rupert Murdoch - pictured), Disney and Time Warner, and the influence they have over the media and society. Not only do they own most of it but they form alliances with second tier companies like Packer's Consolidated Media Holdings (CMH, which was previously PBL), to create greater concentrated pockets of power.

Breit quotes McChesney who claims these oligopolies to be "disastrous" because it decreases the diversity of media interests, standardises content and means deals are often struck to create an advantage without regard to the news agenda. An example of this is Chanel 7's coverage of the Beijing Olympic Games. Besides the poor quality of some of the presenters and the poor reception of Prime at my house (that's another issue all together), events are often showed that don't feature Australians and the swimming finals were televised during Australia's day time, which is when most people are at work. The one answer - money! "NBC (General Electric) paid the International Olympic Committee $844 million for the American broadcast rights for the Beijing Games. (http://sportsbiznews.blogspot.com/2008/08/2008-beijing-summer-olympics-burning.html).
NBC, part of the massive TNC General Electric, have the money and can do pretty well whatever they want. This is exactly what McChesney is talking about. Briet agrees, "Concentration of media ownership into the hands of a few TNC's is threatening the integrity of journalism".

But Nicholas Negroponte thinks TNC's will be short lived and the millions of channels available on the internet will "diffuse the power and give the global village a voice".

What do you think?

Moreover, the Internet boom, among other things, has created a relatively border less community. A border less global community at that. As Breit points out, this has a massive implication on local laws, such as defamation and privacy, which have previously covered particular countries or states. How do laws cover the Internet, and whose laws are adhered to? The two "social watchdogs" (the media and the judiciary), as Breit puts it, are at loggerheads and are seriously under threat. They are under mining each other.

But how do you regulate the Internet?

Breit claims, "No one global body has the power to impose change, so any steps to restore public confidence in these two institutions must take place in the individual nation states". Furthermore, global cooperation and collaboration would help but cyber-jurisdiction is a giant and murky world indeed. Ultimately, Breit exclaims that, "The journalist must do more" in a commercially driven world. She believes that the responsibility basically rests with the individual journalist. Not totally, but mostly. "Journalists must consent to a transparent system of accountability, supplemented by internationalised local laws that acknowledge the changing role of journalists". Breit concludes that a working relationship between the media and the judiciary is required.

My thoughts tend to mirror this view. TNC's will always be there and the growth of technology has only just begun. It is up to journalists to accept the change and adapt to this new global village. At the same time regulators need to be at least aware of these changes and to make appropriate and timely adjustments . To what extent I am not sure but reforms from the media and the judiciary are imperative in order to stay with the times and the technology.

Gold

I was doing some research for another class and came across this website. Now I love the work of Roy and HG but after analysing their interviewing techniques a little further I found myself admiring their work. Not only are they funny, but they are well researched, well organised, ask the tough questions, create rapport with their talent and perform well live. It really brings out another side to sport and media interviewing.

Why they weren't asked to be part of Chanel 7's coverage at the Beijing Olympics is beyond me. But it is Triple J's gain and if you get the chance before the games are over tune into 102.1 and listen to the Golden Ring Show from 4.30pm each day.

Beijing

One week into the games of the 29th Olympiad and I have barely seen a thing. And it has nothing to do with time constraints or lack of wanting. The reception for Prime at my house in Bolwarra (just outside Maitland) has been like watching a Chinese rice fight, speckled dust, or looking into a snow storm at Mount Perisher.

Subsequently, I have turned to Auntie and tuned into 1233 ABC Newcastle each day and night. In the car, on my walkman (yes, my faithful friend from the nineties was resurrected from the dark depths of my second drawer so I could listen to events around Callagahan), and when curled up in bed. And I am so glad I did. Not only has she saved me from Olympic exile on a scale much greater than Marion Jones, but the commentary, on the whole, and coverage has been well informed, entertaining and on the ball.

The radio is one thing but if you get the chance, checkout the coverage of Beijing on ABC online. It is simply unbelievable. Professional and precise with up to date stories, podcasts, pictures, profiles on athletes, videos, blogs, medal tallies, schedules, results, history and trivia. This is CONVERGANCE at its highest quality. An international leader. This is where journalism is in 2008 and the ABC have set the bar for the standard required. Absolutely exceptional. It certainly confirmed my belief about the excellent job that the ABC does, especially in relation to sport. It also reiterated my goal of, one day, being part of that ABC sports team.

Putting the public back into journalism

Angela Romano and Cratis Hippocrates outline several problems with today's reporting, public journalism, public journalism in practice and Australian initiatives like the Public Journalism Project undertaken by the Queensland University of Technology and University of Wollongong in 1998 ("Putting the public back into journalism", Tapsall and Varley, 2001). But it is their conclusion, which I want to focus on.

It is in their conclusion that Romano and Hipoocrates propose five keys to successful public journalism:

1. Establishing the agenda (What issues are important?)
2. Dedicating the resources (Training, time and column space)
3. Setting the timetable (Program for journalistic activities)
4. Obtaining feedback (Eg: letters to the editor and email)
5. Analysing the activities and outcomes Measuring the impact on public perceptions)

Now don't get me wrong, I think the idea of public journalism is a good idea and furthermore, this outline seems simple and makes perfect sense. However, what I struggle with is: time and resources. Public journalism may be possible in bigger media centres but not necessarily in rural news rooms where journalists are few, stories are many and time is stretched to capacity. If public journalism was to occur, it would need to be highly organised, not detract from the valuable, daily news service it provides the people already and somehow create a culture change where citizens would become more involved.

The Chaser

I just love their work. Check out the links below. Well worth a look.

• APEC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdnAaQ0n5-8

• Macca's upsell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SsFXQ0kmLs&feature=related

• Trojan horse: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3SfNANtig&feature=related

What do you think?

A return to practice: reclaiming journalism as public conversation

One of the first points made by Michael Meadows in his chapter, "A return to practice: reclaiming journalism as public conversation" (Tapsall and Varley, 2001), is, "With the expansion of communication and transport technologies, and the onset of the 'post-modern' age of information technology, journalism has been transformed into something else". Factors such as the internet, broadband, digital television, mobile phones, demanding deadlines, citizen journalists and faster transport options have all played a part in the transformation of journalism.

Meadows also makes note of another aspect of modern journalism, previously explored by Carey, "...public spaces were places where public opinion was formed, and the press that emerged at this time 'reflected and animated public conversation'. In contrast, modern journalism forms public opinion rather than reporting on it."

Do you agree with this stand point? Does modern journalism simply form, rather than report, public opinion in 2008?

But the most interesting part of Meadows reading was considering "journalism as a cultural practice and media as a cultural resource". Meadows quotes Italian journalist Antonio Gramsci who believes media to be the "most dynamic part" of the "ideological structure of society". Meadow adds, "The media and journalism are part of an array of institutions and practices that form culture." I tend to agree with this stand point.

Meadows continues by referring to Gramsci's notion of "good sense" and the Italians "ideal of journalism - integral journalism". This engages an active audience and satisfies the public, which "resonates with Carey's notion of journalism as a public conversation and, in turn, with Jay Rosen's idea of public, civic, or community journalism." In throy, this sounds like good practice, but how do we bring this into being?

Meadows also turns to the work of journalism educator, Adam, who states, "Journalism is a form of expression that is an invention" Furthermore, "...the more stories people read about crime, especially of events they can't control, the more likely they are inclined to think crime is out of control". Therefore, "Sources selected by journalists play a crucial role in giving rise to how society is imagined". This certainly highlights the power the media has upon society, which is quite scary in a way. But ultimately, predominately true.

Meadows then quotes the five principles of journalistic design, according to Adam:

1. news and news judgment
   
2. reporting or evidentiary method
3. linguistic technique
4. narrative technique
5. method of interpretation or meaning

It is a little deeper than the old inverted pyramid, and 5W and H theories, but I can see the merit in it. News and news judgment is what story you do, reporting method would be your sources, linguistics simply refers to the language and how it is used, how you tell the story comes under the banner of narrative, but I struggle to make sense of the method of interpretation or meaning.

Finally, Meadows concludes: "If journalists are intellectuals playing a critical role in applying a set of cultural practices in particular ways, then there seems much that could be achieved beyond the mundabe reporting of the everyday; beyond a routine reliance on institutional sources; beyond the shallow view that journalists merely 'reflect reality'; beyond a reliance on the flawed notion of the fourth estate and the limiting effects of objectivity and professionalism."

Is this something we should all be striving for? How realistic is Meadow's view?

Regional Journalism Conference

I accepted an invitation from Christina and secured a place (a free one at that) to the Regional Journalism Conference held at Customs House on Saturday. i was only able to attend the morning session but I was able to pick up quite a few useful hints. Firstly, ABC reporter Chris Masters (pictured) talked to us about story telling and his days as a reporter in Albury. It was also good to be surrounded by peers from other regional papers and to hear their stories, problems and issues. It was comforting to know that I was not on my own at the Maitland Mercury. There were other people out there, many much more experienced than I, in the same boat.

Ths issue of the the Internet, blogs and public journalism was also raised and one website in particular caught my attention. Check it out, the link is below.

http://www.ourpatch.com.au/

Also, if you are working in the media, or are looking for work in the media, make sure you visit the Media and Entertainment, Arts Alliance (MEAA) website (http://www.alliance.org.au), join the union and become a member of the Australian Journalists Association (AJA). Well worth doing.

Future of Journalism

After watching a bit about the Future of Journalism summit in class today, I found a related article that might be of interest to some of you, which can be found at: http://www.thefutureofjournalism.org.au/. I also discovered the importance of Jay Rosen (pictured) in this field. Enjoy.

Comfort or Curse?

"News is what someone, somewhere, wants concealed. Everything else is advertising." (Jervis, 1987 as cited by Sheridan Burns in Journalism, 2001, pp. 23)

This may be true to some level but it is an interesting way to start this chapter. Are journos the flames for social justice? To "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable?"Or has it moved away from this and is the media simply entertainment? Or should it be a balance between information and entertainment?

Personally, I draw the most inspiration for journalists and journalism from the anecdote about the writer, the actor and the musician, told at the end of Sheridan Burns' chapter:

• "Perhaps the answer lies in the convergance of their lives rather than the differences. What they had in common, all along, was a desire to engage the world, to touch people."
• "A journalist is someone who believes there are answers, and wants to find them."
• "All journalists seek in some way to touch an audience, to make some sense of what they discover in the world, and share the news."

All this makes sense and really does sound wonderful, but it is really the case? I hope deep down it is what lies at the heart of it all - the passionate fire that burns within.

Any thoughts?

What is a journalist?

As the face of journalism rapidly expands, changes and morphs into the online age of the 21st century, it raises many questions and issues both media producers and consumers. Suellen Tapsall and Carolyn Varley clearly point this out in Chapter 1 of "Journalism: Theory in Practice" (Tapsall and Varley, 2001, pp.3), "It used to be simple. If you wanted to know what was going on in the world, you picked up the paper, listened to the radio, or turned on the television." We all know that this is far from the case today.

Although these traditional media formats still exist and are still used by a broad audience, the internet has really changed the face of how media is produced and consumed. Firstly, consumption, and news is simply a click away. A world at the end of your fingertips and sitting right in front of your face. From nineMSN to google and everything in between, people of all ages who have access to the World Wide Web can access information at their leisure at what ever time they see fit. This information no longer has to come from the morning newspaper, John Laws or the 6pm news bulletin.

The production of news has also changed dramatically. Interviews are now podcast as well as broadcast, newspaper hacks blog and television footage makes You Tube. This has blurred the line between producer and consumer but Tapsall and Varely believe the essence of journalism remains: "Ultimately, the essence that distinguishes journalists from these other information brokers might be the commitment to the public good and the notion of responsibility beyond self and employer. The commitment will need to be balanced with a commitment to truthfulness, accuracy, and personal and professional integrity, and a realistic appreciation of the current dependence of journalists on the news organisations' bottom line."

Today, there is a convergance of journalistic skills across various technological advances but some of the qualities mentioned above must remain.

Do you think a journalist has these qualities today? Is it important to uphold these qualities? What other qualities should journalists possess?

Frontline 2

Here is another amusing snippet from the Frontline crew. This time - the wonderful world media continuity as well as live and pre-recorded interviews.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4I9GTVvyGs&feature=related

Enjoy!

Frontline

You may have already seen this in class, studied it in Year 12, or just been entertained along the way - Frontline. Absolute gold. If you haven't seen it, or you just want to refresh your memory, here is a link to a clip on You Tube. This one talks about Mike Moore and point scoring in an interview!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cwfne1aYA3g&feature=related

Enjoy!

Debut journo post

Well here it is, post number one of the journalism course. I have to admit that this is actually my second time into the blogging world (but the first for class work). I have another blog, which can be found at www.pullingupstumps.blogspot.com. This outlines my world cricketing adventure earlier this year and includes a couple of pics as well. The posts were stories that were published in the Maitland Mercury in a diary-like series while I was away. Please feel free to check it out and stay tuned for more on the Josh and Journalism blog.