-Chapter 17: Perils of Defamation (from p. 408)
My 'Journalism Junk' blog has come this far, I can only hope it has been a pleasure for all who have encountered and read it!
My intention was mainly to encourage people to gain an insight into the world of journalism, mediated through my own reflections and opinions, so I hope you got something out of it over these many weeks of Daily Miracle textbook readings!
I do have a bit of a 'theme' running through these postings, so if this were the first time you have visited my blog, I'd strongly recommend checking some previous editions out! And make sure you check out my final post for this subject next week!
Anyway, moving right along now...
J. JONAH JAMESON QUOTE OF THE WEEK:
Peter Parker says: "Spider-Man wasn't trying to attack the city, he was trying to save it. That's slander."
To which Jameson replies: "It is not. I resent that. Slander is spoken. In print, it's libel."
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: ONLINE NEWS (p. 313)
There is a record number for this chapter alone, plus there is another round to come after these! I suggest you settle in and get as comfortable as you can for a long journey!
1. What do media companies need to do in relation to convergence before they can expect their journalists to work in converged newsrooms?
They need to ensure that they aren't trying to force journalists to engage in every style of journalism ever conceived, but rather trying to build up a relationship between those personnel of cross media boundaries. Everyone needs to know their own role and how others work in order to effectively co-operate and establish positive, clear communication, but not necessarily be fully qualified and expect to undertake any duty from television to print and everything in between!
2. What would be the likely outcome if someone who just wanted to work as a print journalist, because they were nervous on television, was told by the company they worked for that they must report for television as well as print?
As I mentioned before, people working in any of these areas need to have a knowledgeable understanding across a wide range of media in order to function in a converged news room, however if someone that worked in print was suddenly made to be on T.V and they didn't have the necessary 'aesthetic' qualities, it would have catastrophic effects for their overall confidence and career development, and it is highly likely the media organisation would suffer due to consumers declining to watch their news, and therefore the loss of key advertising revenue and therefore funding. So, whilst this style of 'convergence' may work in theory, the negative consequences far out way the benefits!
3. Is journalistic convergence just a trendy fad that will run its course then be forgotten about?
I think I’ll let a few small extracts from The Daily Miracle answer this one:
"Convergence is the flavour of the month, but it seems that journalists working for the US media conglomerate [Media General] which was said to be a model for all to follow were not really using it. The fact is that what is really driving cross-platform news reporting - as distinct from converged, or cross-media, ownership - is the web" (p. 299).
"In the current media environment in Australia it is extremely unlikely that newspapers, radio, or television will disappear. They are too profitable in their own right". (p. 299)
4.What would be the long-term outcome in Australia of relaxed cross-media ownership laws?
These are only possible outcomes, nothing 100% certain, however the following could occur:
- Domination by rich, prominent media moguls of all platforms
- Lack of diversity within each form
- Consumers lose faith in all media forms if they are controlled by few organisations providing little diversity
- Advertisers may become disillusioned with converging tactics and may elect not to provide needed funds
In summary, it certainly wouldn't increase media diversity and accuracy!
5. If you had a crystal ball, what would it tell you about the future of radio, television, and the web?
Simply to not be so paranoid about the Internet converging all media and becoming the only medium by which to receive any news. All the contemporary media forms that exist in the present each have a unique purpose, and there is no need to replace them in favour of one form.
And who knows...maybe something even better and more sophisticated may come along?
6. Should the idea of multiskilling be integrated into every course in university journalism studies? Why?
I think that it should definitely be something to consider in the future, as multi-skilled media industries is certainly where the future is heading, and for journalists to have myriad skills across a platform of different media would assist in adapting to the whole issue of 'convergence.' For instance, it should be university students studying journalism pick a major in one particular media format, and also gain extra knowledge on others. It will probably be a highly preferred job credential that employers look for: the multiskilled journalists!
7. Is society getting to a point where life as we know it could not survive without the Internet and web?
I think society is already at that point. I know if Internet savvy people stopped and thought once in a while how much they depend on it for work and social purposes, they would be very surprised about how much they take it for granted. Casing point, as I write these words, the though just occurs to me that I am writing a blog which will be published to the web for anyone in the world to read, and those massive, philosophical thoughts hardly enter the common consciousness. It's just a given now!
Also, imagine getting through the HSC or university without it. I'd say near impossible.
Researching, communicating in terms of social networking and work related uses, online learning tools, emails...there's a lot more to it when you really think about it!
The Internet mediates our whole society; I'd even go as far to say it dictates much of our lives to varying degrees!
Here's a challenge I put to you all: Make a mental note of how many consumer products or advertisements don't include some sort of web address to further your knowledge of their products etc
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: PERILS OF DEFAMATION (p. 431)
All this legal action concerning defamation and suing is certainly a highly complex area of journalism, but it can also be interesting once you get your head around it!
I'm going to attempt that now through answering these three discussion questions:
1. You are a newspaper editor. One of your reporters has made an honest mistake that defamed someone. You publish an apology. The person defamed is not satisfied and wants you to print a full-page feature story promoting her business or she will sue. What will you do?
If further negotiation proves unsuccessful, then I'd have no choice but to take the matter to court. My reasoning for this is that I have no guarantee that the plaintiff won't turn around and sue the newspaper, regardless of whether I fulfil her request. I'd ensure I would not compensate for someone's alleged defamation case due to threat of blackmail.
2. Would you support a 'public figure' defence for the media that would sharply limit the rights of public figures, ranging from premiers to cricketers and rock stars, to take out defamation suits against the media? Why?
No. Because these people are constantly in the public eye, and chances are, they are more likely to be defamed. Limiting their rights to take out defamation suits against the media inhibits their status in society, and would just generate more outrage and more complication with legal action. In addition, it would be a very 'grey area' in defining who is exempt from the laws and who isn't, and this would generate more controversy. For example, is it acceptable for someone such as Andrew Hansen from ABC TV's The Chaser's War on Everything to take out defamation against someone, but not the Prime Minister of Australia, John Howard?
3. You have promised a confidential source that you will not identify her. However, you discover that what she told you is untrue. Your newspaper is sued for defamation. You try to contact the person but she has vanished. Do you reveal her identity in court? Why?
After a considerable attempt has made to contact her and it has been confirmed that the information she gave was false, then it would seem that revealing her would be the best, if only, option. If I couldn't contact her and she has disappeared, then obviously her intentions in providing her information to the media was to somewhat sabotage an individual or company's reputation. Since the reason for it was unknown, I wouldn't feel the need to protect her confidentiality anymore because again, her actions were obviously strategically planned to inflict the most damage possible, and deliberately mislead the public.
JOURNALISM ISSUE ENTRY:
The Chapter about online news particularly interested me this week, especially some of the theories of the future of other media forms, and the powerful, dominant nature of the Internet and all its potential to influence the direction of all media. Convergence seems to be the biggest talking point with the Internet revolution. Traditional ways of receiving news and current affairs is certainly transforming, but like the chapter in The Daily Miracle stresses, they won't be replaced by new media, rather complimented for the purpose of the public furthering their knowledge of any given subject or story which interests them. For example, if they watch an intriguing story on ABC's 7:30 Report, or miss the program they intended to watch, they have the convenience of being able to visit the website, and/or download a 'podcast' or 'vodcast' to their PC to watch at any time!
In my opinion, this is all fantastic news for the future of news, but in this week's blog I'd like to discuss an unexpected 'media centre' which is at the forefront of 'cutting edge' convergence: It is none other than Nintendo's new home console the NINTENDO WII!
This new device could change video gaming forever, with its easy accessibility for all who play it young and old. This audience demographic is inherent in its name, (Wii) meaning its simple and inclusive of all, gamer or non-gamer.
I own one myself, and just by having an active broadband Internet connection and turning it on, you instantly have access to myriad content literally at your fingertips via the Wii-mote, a TV remote like controller which responds via motion as determined by the gamer, and pointing it at the screen and pressing a few buttons:
The type of content you have access to is a digital photo manipulation channel, internet surfing, Wii shop where you can buy 'old-school' games, a news and current affairs channel and regular global weather updates! This is what the interface looks like:
Now, I should point out I am by no means trying to sell this product, it just serves as such a superb example of where media convergence is headed, and again, the power and influence of the web as more and more people become connected and it increasingly becomes INFORMATION ON DEMAND! And then what implications will this have?
Make sure you check Zeejay's Journalism Junk next week for the final post of this university second semester!
What's that? You just can't wait and want a little taster?
It's based around The Daily Miracle's Chapter 16: Ethical journalism: is it an oxymoron?
So if you want to read ahead so we can have a heated debate about what I'm sure will be controversial issues raised, then by all means...I compel you to.
And who knows? You may even want to drop me a comment and offer some constructive criticism on my blog?
Or now am I being just a little TOO ambitious?
Ask A Ninja Question 31 "TechNINlogy"
No comments:
Post a Comment