@MolksTVTalk

Our last lecture of the semester was given by Steve Molks, a professional Brisbane blogger who specialises in television analysis and critiquing. Molks’ lecture was both informative and entertaining. He knew exactly what is going on in the word of television and why it was happening. The fact that he has (or, more realistically, is trying to) make his living out of something he enjoys doing, is inspirational.

Molks told us that television is the core of popular culture, setting the public attitude. As a result of this, TV offers everyone the opportunity to become armchair directors, producers, casting agents & critics – this is aided by an increase in the social networking technologies of web 2.0. Even though the way we watch TV is changing, the fact that EVERYONE watches and talks about it has not.

However, Steve brought up the “nothing ever happens in Brisbane, including television related events” thought that, I’m sure a lot of people have, which is a little sad but realistic and a fact that we are just all going to have to live with.

A very chilled out, yet educational lecture, this was the perfect way to end the amazing semester that was JOUR1111.

See Molks at work on http://molkstvtalk.com/

JOUR1111: Annotated Bibliography

The 2011 London riots were heavily broadcasted in the international media. Investigations have uncovered that social networking devices were used to organise and rally looters. Because of this, British Prime Minister David Cameron proposed to restrict the use of services such as Facebook, Twitter and BlackBerry Messenger to disadvantage rioters. While spokespeople from these social networking sites put up no resistance to this temporary shutdown[1], some journalists, social media and legal experts have ridiculed the suggestion. Facebook, Twitter and BlackBerry Messenger are associated with “Web 2.0”. Web 2.0 technology allows for “produsage”, a term coined by QUT Lecturer Axel Bruns. Here, he explains this relevance of this:

“Produsage demonstrates the changed content production value chain model in collaborative online environments: in these environments, a strict producer/consumer dichotomy no longer applies -instead, users are almost always also able to be producers of content, and often necessarily so in the very act of using it.”[2]

However, the issue at hand is, as PM Cameron told Parliament, that this “free flow of information can be used for good. But it can also be used for ill".

Below are four sources which comment on the use of Web 2.0 applications, especially in the case of the London Riots. These sources have been critically examined and referenced.

Harrison, J. (2009). Case Studies of Communication Campaigns using Web 2.0. Indooroopilly, Australia: HAS Pty Ltd. Ch. 1.

Dr. John Harrison brings his thirty years of professional practice in his writing and editing.  Decades of experience in print, radio and television as an award winning journalist, editor and producer, identity him a credible and unbiased source in critiquing the changes in media – internet relations. The chapter outlines the changes in the way the web has been used, focusing on the Web 2.0 stage. This stage, it is argued, makes digital technologies more accessible to users in a way that causes the users to become producers, relatively unchecked in what they may publish. This “social media” is characterized by its inactivity, encouraging openness, participation, conversation, speed and connectedness. Harrison uses graphs and data to effectively argue that worldly participation in social media is rapidly increasing. By quoting Marshall McLuhan, Harrison illustrates his belief that social networking should be recognized as a legitimate form of communication and supports Prime Minister Cameron’s belief that the amplified “power of expression” that online networking facilitates can be detrimental to society as was the case in the London riots. Although this chapter was informative and unbiased, the author’s opinion on the advantages of web 2.0 and the death of web 1.0 were not made clear.

Keane, B. (2011). London Riots: The (Social) Media Is To Blame, Apparently. Retrieved 20^th October, 2011. http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/08/10/london-riots-the-social-media-is-to-blame-apparently/

Bernard Keane reports for Crikey, an independent self-titled “fourth estate”, working to scrutinize the “performance and activities of business, the media, PR and other important sectors”[3],  on politics, media, and economics. However, the informal terminology used in this piece, for example, reference to a “face palm moment”, suggests either incompetent authorship or an attempt to reach a younger audience. Though, as the article is written in an informal style, and is factually accurate, this suggests that this informality aims to connect with a younger audience. Keane makes reference to the comparison of the “Arab Spring” revolution which others made; however, Keane infers that this comparison is ridiculous. Quotes from The Daily Mail, The Sun and The Guardian, all of which reputable papers, also add to the article’s credibility. However, it’s independence is showcased when Keane notes their “attack” on the “competing medium” that is social media. This negative bias is particularly noted in Fairfax pieces. Keane goes on to defend Twitter from the allegations made against the site, explaining that it BlackBerry Messaging technology that was used to rally looters in London. This opposes Prime Minister Cameron’s proposal. To conclude, Keane states his opinon: “in short, the role of social media in events is highly complex and not clear at all, but that plainly hasn’t stopped the finger pointing”, and ends the article by questioning the responsibility of social media sites and censorship levels, and asking: Should these organizations comply with police and use confidential information to track criminal activity?

Wilson, A. (Presenter/Writer). (2011). Social Media During The Riots - Right Or Wrong? [SKY NEWS]. Season 811, Episode 0812. Available from http://www.youtube.com/watch? feature=player_embedded&v=KJOSZLH3rlA#!

Here, Conservative MP Louise Mensch, former Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott and Guardian journalist Paul Lewis join SkyNews journalist Andrew Wilson to discuss the Prime Minister’s proposal to shut down social networking sites in times of unrest when it could facilitate criminal activity. Lewis initiated the debate by stating that that a media blackout in a time of crisis would be oppressive to England’s freedom of expression, calling it a “hot headed and wrong knee jerk reaction”. As Lewis is employed as  Special Projects Editor for the Guardian and has won awards for outstanding investigative journalism, it is inferred that his opinion is both reliable and accurate. As Mensch is a conservative party politician, her support of the state was predictable. However her point – that false alarms are all too easy to set up on twitter – was valid. Lord John Prescott firmly opposed the Prime Minister’s proposition, stating that social networking is a source of good as there are more people who reap the benefits of it than who are disadvantaged, including the police. This debate was informative, however it would have benefited from a prior defining of some terms, as some time was spent arguing over trivial matters.

The Economist. (2011). The BlackBerry Riots: Rioters Used BlackBerrys Against The Police; Can Police Use Them Against Rioters? The Economist, August 13^th, pp 11 – 12.

The Economist magazine published its articles anonymously, it is difficult to research the journalist’s background and find a bias. As it is, the article is a factual piece and there is little bias to be found. Also, the Economist is a reputable and high quality magazine which secures the accuracy of information and credible viewpoint of the article.

The Economist assumes that their readers are of the opinion that social networking orchestrated the national unrest. The article investigates police using social networking against rioters and looters and questions whether this would be possible. The answer is affirmative: the Data Protection Act, which normally prevents companies from sharing such information, has a get-out clause for cases where it is clear that a crime has been committed. So too does this article refer to the revolutions in the Middle East, linking them with those in London through their connection to social media. However the scope and depth between the two are seen as wanting. As in Bernard Keane’s Crikey report, this article takes the viewpoint that, as Louise Mensch’s stated in the Sky News interview “any comparison between these riots and those in Egypt are so ridiculous as to be called laughable”.

By analysing these four different forms of media: academic and peer reviewed book chapter, less critiqued (and thus, less reliable) online article, television debate and published magazine article, it is possible to investigate and evaluate the value of British Prime Minister David Cameron proposal to restrict the use of social networking services. The sources suggest that perhaps a new code of ethics in the face of the emergence of web 2.0 technologies will need to be instituted.

Reference list

Black, S. (2011) About Crikey! Retrieved 20^th October, 2011 from site http://www.crikey.com.au/about/

Bruns, A. (2010). Towards a Broader Framework for User-Led Content Creation. Retrieved 20^th October, 2011 from site http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Lw8KhDXrl3UJ:citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi%3D10.1.1.105.3421%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf+Produsage+demonstrates+the+changed+content+production+value+chain+model+in+collaborative+online+environments&hl=en&gl=au&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgIgn-nFRkkCh- AwyiH2pCgsj8wN3M15f1kX7M5XzITxbZXipNKK29VCkBat1y_QALkpdFd4PHuyVgvTqEl2tSL9uZZmT14zIRCfE225UIaOgPR_7Fh5ZHdNv2AGhYXz-aHluJL&sig=AHIEtbTa5n4ZgRmZ0mEmNxdKVqJ74Jr3Hw 

The Guardian (Producer). (2011). London Riots: Social Media Bosses Questioned – Video [THE GUARDIAN ONLINE]. Available from http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2011/sep/16/uk-social-media-chiefs-questioned-video

[1] The Guardian, 2011

[2] Bruns, A. 2010 

[3] Black, S. 2011

---

Interesting Video on Media Ethics in the Web 2.0 Era

In my efforts to find media sources for my annotated bibliography, I came across this totally unhelpful and irrelevant video on youtube about ethics in the web 2.0 era. The video was made by students Lindsay Cooper, Julie Mansmann, Vincent Seibert, and Mika Iwakari at SUNY, New Paltz.

I found it very interesting a thought provoking, so take a look!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=op9vugimuko

Page One – Inside the New York Times

The link below will take you to the Official Page One – Inside the New York Times Website. Here there is a short description of the documentary and lists of characters and producers.

http://www.magpictures.com/pageone/

Lisa Schwarzbaum of the US Entertainment Weekly described the movie watching experience as “similar to the thrill of glimpsing the man behind the curtain of the great and powerful Oz." I have to agree with this comment, the film was insightful and entertaining – the appearance of David Carr made certain of this.

Although all characters were certainly held their own, Carr’s sometimes disturbing honest, knowledgeable and opinionated, yet sarcastic and for lack of a better term “bad assed”, attitude stole the show.

As an educational documentary, the film was fascinating. The conclusion reached: that journalism is not dying, simply changing. The employment of Brian Stelter, scouted from his blog, evidences this.

However, although Carr and his associates stated that The New York Times would never go under, it is difficult to ignore the fact that a lot of newspapers have recently. Although it is unlikely that such a prestigious newspaper would collapse, a lack of funding may cause some decrease in the quality of the investigations. However, there is no evidence that this is imminent for the Times.

In all, this film was superb. It was a great review of all the course themes we have studied this semester.

Broadway Show Critique

Last night, on the 20^th of October, I had the privilege of attending the Villanova College Broadway production. The show featured the voices and orchestrations of both the young ladies of Loreto College and gentlemen of Villanova College. Director of Music at Villanova, Dr Peter Morris, directed, produced and conducted the show and organised the presence of two guest artists.

Married couple Rachael Beck and Ian Stenlake performed their way through their favourite Broadway solos and duets with gusto. If you find yourself wondering where you’ve heard Ian’s name, you may remember him from Channel 9’s Sea Patrol or from Carols by Candlelight. Ms Beck’s self-proclaimed claim to fame was her season of kissing Hugh Jackman eight times a week, when she played Belle against his Gaston in The Beauty and the Beast. Since her debut, she has performed nationally and internationally, touring with such prominent composers as Jason Robert Brown.

In critiquing the orchestra, I could find no faults. Morris runs a tight ship. If the student’s weren’t wearing uniforms, they would indistinguishable from the professionals who performed with them. Indeed, qualified musicians Ben Langford (trumpet) and Brenda Sullivan (violin) performed with pupils at the highest standard.

The voices of the choir were not so seamless. Although the timbre of both choirs was excellent, their diregard of entries and cut offs somewhat spoiled the beauty of the compositions. While some broke the mould, faces and voices were expressionless – unacceptable when performing Broadway and musical theatre songs which require over expression and articulation.

However, unless Beck was aiming to overcompensate for the backup’s lack of stage presence, her clear love of attention was - at least - annoying. At most it tainted her performance, pulling focus from the lyrics and characterisation. Her solid lower register suited most songs. However, when the performance required higher notes, it became strained, screechy and weak. Beck’s bold wardrobe choices were warmly welcomed by the male students she performed with.

The chemistry between Beck and Stenlake, as well as their audience interaction was greatly appreciated by the excited audience. As was Stenlake’s charisma, as he acted and sang along with the audience and select male soloists. Despite his sweet timbre, Stenlake’s voice was unsuited to the repertoire, and was greatly outmatched by Villanova singing teacher and former Ten Tenor Craig Atkinson.

Atkinson and fellow teacher Natalie Richards performed solos and duets throughout the night. While Richard’s baby bump was the source of many gags on stage, her contemporary styled voice did not match those of her fellow soloists.

Overall, the concert was a huge hit. Staging and lighting were used magnificently to reflect the emotion of the songs. The Augustine Centre was a huge and professional venue, suited to the talent of the performers. 

Week 11: Investigative Journalism

This week we spoke about investigative journalism, which – according to Lord Northcliffe – is all about discovering the truth. There are 5 INs to investigative journalism:

Intelligence – the piece must be intelligent and ask intelligent questions

Informed – the story must be factual and informative

Intuitive – the journalist must use initiative to capture the story

Inside – there must be some inside information

Invest – the journalist must invest time and effort; they must wear out  their “shoe leather”

Investigative journalists also have a duty to be critical and thorough so as to assume roles as “custodians of conscience” and expose the truth to their audience. By providing this truth, journalists offer a voice for the voiceless and hold the powerful to account, as a Fourth Estate (Fourth Branch of Govt/ Watchdog).

After this explanation, were five examples of “trailblazers” whose investigative journalism have – at the risk of sounding cliché – changed the world. These are listed below:

1.       Edward Smith Hall’s column in The Sydney Monitor” in the early 19th century criticized the existing form of government. It stood for trial by jury and a popular legislature, and it condemned the oppression of convicts, public immorality on the part of officers, and even the conduct of the governor himself.

2.       “The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon” Campaign. Printed in the Pall Mall Gazette in July, 1885, the "Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon" was Stead's highly scandalous expose of child prostitution. Its publication led to the age of consent being raised from 12 to 16.

3.       Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein’s “Watergate” pieces led to the arrest of five burglars who broke into Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate office building. The investigation led to the resignation (1974) of US President Nixon as he was charged with obstruction of justice, abuse of presidential powers, and trying to impede the impeachment process by defying committee subpoenas.

I found this case especially interesting - you can read more about in The Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/watergate/

4.       More recently and locally, Chris Masters, Phil Dickie and Shaun Hoyt’s work on “The Moonlight State” story led to the Fitzgerald inquiry. The inquiry was established in response to a series of articles on high-level police corruption in The Courier-Mail, followed by a Four Corners television report. Both pieces highlighted prostitution, gambling and possible police corruption in Brisbane. The inquiry resulted in the deposition of a premier, two by-elections, the jailing of three former ministers and a police commissioner who was jailed and lost his knighthood.[1]

5.       The Wikileaks pieces, headed by Julian Assange are still causing ripples in American politics (as well as in other nations)

These cases of investigative journalism show that there are several different types of investigation interaction:

·         Interviews

·         Observations

·         Documents

·         Briefings

·         Leaks

·         Trespass

·         Theft

As well as different methods of investigation methods, including interviewing, observing and analysing document.

The main threat to investigative journalism is the lack of funding that comes with the so called “death of newspapers”. With less funding, there is less pay and thus less incentive for proper investigation. Also, a growth in PR is resulting in a decline of journalism. This is shown in the slide below:

We ended the lecture by talking about the future of investigative journalism – which seems to be quite difficult to predict. The only answer I have to the question “will pay walls lead to the rebirth of investigations and proper journalism?” is that only time will tell. However, I believe that we need to make people more aware of the legitimate need for informed and critical journalism, for it to grow and thrive.

---

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitzgerald_Inquiry

Week Ten: News Values

Investigating news values is to investigate yet another level of agenda setting. The definition given in this week’s lecture states that "News journalism has a broadly agreed set of values, often referred to as 'newsworthiness': the degree of prominence a media outlet gives to a story, and the attention that is paid by an audience”. There are four aspects of these values. These are:

1.      Impact: The “gee whiz” factor

2.      Audience Identification: What the audience relates to, which causes them to take interest in the news

3.      Pragmatics: The everyday affairs that must be documented

4.      Source Influence: The public relations effect. As Julia Hobsbawm (a UK PR executive) stated “Journalism loves to hate PR … whether for spinning, controlling access, approving copy, or protecting clients at the expense of the truth. Yet journalism has never needed public relations more, and PR has never done a better job for the media.”

Here, two questions arose:

1.      Are News Values the same across different news services?

2.      Are News Values the same across different countries / cultures?

To which Dr Redman answered: “No, they differ greatly in both cases”.

The following diagram shows how news worthiness is used in news stories and articles.

Harold Evans and John Sergeant agree on the opinion that a sense of news values is not something a journalist can actively learn. Rather, it is something you pick up: an instinct. However, over the years (since Galtung & Rugestudies’s in 1965), studies have found distinct values that attribute to a story’s newsworthiness. Although there are some changes throughout these studies, the majority of values stay the same. This led me to ask the question: has the audience really changed, in what they want to hear or read about?

These 12 Values can be seen in the table below:

However, in tutorials this week, we decided that three “new” values could be added. These included:

·         Health

·         Terrorism

·         Finance (especially relating to the Global Financial Crisis)

From this study, three hypotheses were found:

1.      The additivity hypothesis that the more factors an event satisfies, the higher the probability that it becomes news.

2.      The complementarity hypothesis that the factors will tend to exclude each other.

3.      The exclusion hypothesis that events that satisfy none or very few factors will not become news.

Dr Redman then went on to explain where journalistic news values are at currently. He had three main critiques. Firstly, journalists have become lazy an incompetent. This has resulted in tabloidization, and is aided by the influence of PR. Lastly, the news has become hyper-commercialized (the reasons for this hyper-localization were discussed in the Public Media lecture in week eight). Dr Redman also highlighted the ideological notions of journalism compared to the realities:

We finished the lecture with a discussion of how the “people formerly known as the audience” have changed, and Dr Redman provided some quotes for thought:

“You don’t own the eyeballs. You don’t own the press, which is now divided into pro and amateur zones. You don’t control production on the new platform, which isn’t one-way. There’s a new balance of power between you and us. The people formerly known as the audience are simply the public made realer, less fictional, more able, less predictable. You should welcome that, media people. But whether you do or not we want you to know we’re here.”

Assesment Piece 2: Story Telling Excersise