After a few long long long long weeks of drafting out my plans for major feature, I finally settled on a topic. For those of you who have read my earlier posts, I thought my heart was set on investigatig social media and the impact on crime and police investigations. However I've come to realise (unfortunately) that my topic had limited connection with the journalism course! Dam.....
So my new topic da da da dahhhh!!!!! How are local journalists relying on social networking sites (Facebook, Twitter) to gain 'real results'? I am looking into how local journos in my home town (Central Coast) use social media to source stories, gain leads, increase contacts and decide on story angles.
A survey conducted in the US revealed that 65% of journalists are comfortable in turning to social networking sites for story research. So of course, I wanted to discover whether or not there is an emerging trend like this in Australia and on a more localised level - the Central Coast. Over the holidays, I interviewed a range of journalists working in print and radio to gain an insight into this emerging trend. So far, I've discovered the longer a journalist has been in th job, the less likely they are to utilise social media as a tool in the newsgathering process. I was able to compare experiences from two quite respected journos on the coast, one having been in the industry for 40 years and the other a journo of only 3 years! They both contradicted each other in many ways, however I'm hoping this will provide an interesting answer to my question.
I asked the experienced 40 year print journalist whether or not he believes social media is changing journalism for better or worse and found his answer to be particularly interesting. Despite his reluctance to jump on the Facebook bandwagon he admitted, "Murdoch is embracing it as a way to the future, I certainly think there's a place for it, however it's definately not the be all and end all!"
And so it seems today is Murdoch's way or the highway! I suppose all I can say is good luck to the oldies who've upheld traditional journalism for 40+ years...
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
How far would you go for a story?
This was the question that we, as third year journalism students were forced to consider after Belinda provided an interesting presentation on moral minefields. I must admit her opening statement, “a Journalist’s choice must always be justified and must not lead into uncertain territories” did scare me a little. The potential for danger in the media industry is extremely high and I am grateful to the uni for drilling this into our heads during our degree. It scares me how naive budding journalists would be as they to step foot into the industy via a cadetship (for example) without having been exposed to the moral minefields and ethical dilemmas they will most probably face in their career (all of which we have learnt in a Communications degree).
As a journalist, as well as using my own moral compass, I am comforted by the idea that may media companies (News Ltd, Fairfax and The Age) have now developed and established their very own codes of ethics to assist journalists in their work. We all know that media scrutinise power and you'd be naive to think they do not exercise it, however should they truly be held accountable for their work? Of course they should! And even better, Media Watch's website provides a list of all existing Australian Media Codes of Practice, open to anyone to view. The link is here FYI: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/resources.htm.
The Sydney Morning Herald in particular has also upheld its professional conduct since the very beginning...
Our editorial management shall be conducted upon principles of candour, honesty and honour. We have no wish to mislead; no interest to gratify by unsparing abuse or indiscriminate approbation. The Sydney Morning Herald, April 18, 1831, April 18, 1831
The code reflects both the Fairfax group's corporate values statement and incorporates the code of ethics of the Australian Journalists Association and has been the root of journalism for 170 years. To see the code in full, click on the following link: http://www.smh.com.au/ethicscode/index.html.
In contrast, I find The Age's code of conduct easy to comprehend, understand and relate to. The way the editor has structured the clauses allow for it to be easily read by journalists, students or any member of the public. I think it's important to break up the issues of professional and personal practice as although they are similar, there are also many differences. Here are a few examples of the clauses in which I find particularly interesting and relevant.
Professional Practice
1. Staff should seek to act always in the best interests of the public and the maintenance of good faith with the community we serve, rather than for the benefit of sectional interests.
2. The public interest includes investigating and exposing crime, serious misdemeanour and seriously anti-social conduct, and investigating and exposing hypocrisy, falsehoods or double standards of behavior by public figures or institutions. It also includes protecting public health and safety.
3. Staff should seek to present only fair, balanced and accurate material.
4. Direct quotations should not be changed to alter their context or meaning.
5. Where a significant inaccuracy or distortion has been published, The Age should publish a correction or clarification promptly.
6. Photographs should be a true representation of events. Photographs should be used in context, captions should be fair and accurate, and digitally enhanced images and illustrations must be clearly labelled.
7. Where they relate to The Age, judgments by the Australian Press Council and other such bodies, and the outcome of defamation actions, should be reported promptly.
8. Editorial material should distinguish for the reader between that which is comment, that which is verified fact and that which is speculation.
9. All commentary and analysis should meet the same standards of factual accuracy as news reports.
10. Sources promised confidentiality must be protected at all costs. However, where possible, the sources of information should be identified as specifically as possible.
11. Only fair and honest means should be used to obtain material. Misrepresentation and the use of concealed equipment or surveillance devices should be avoided. The use of deceptive methods or subterfuge may be condoned only where the Editor is convinced that the potential story is of vital public interest and there is no other way of obtaining the story.
In such cases, the journalist has the right to decline an assignment. If the journalist accepts the assignment, the nature of deceptive methods and the reasons for their use must be published with the story. Journalists deployed in this manner will be indemnified by The Age.
12. People's privacy should be respected and intrusions on privacy should be published only if there is a public interest.
13. Caution should be exercised about reporting and publishing identifying details, such as street names and numbers, that may enable others to intrude on the privacy or safety of people who have become the subject of media coverage.
14. People should be treated with sensitivity during periods of grief and trauma and wherever possible, be approached through an intermediary.
15. Care should be taken when producing and publishing material on the anniversary of traumatic events or crimes not to cause undue distress to the victims or their families.
16. Photographs of victims or grieving people should not be published unless due consideration has been given to issues of sensitivity and privacy. Any restrictions placed on the use of photographs supplied by family or friends should be honored.
17. Gratuitous references to the state of a victim's body or body parts should not be published.
18. The Age will not publish individual cases of suicide, unless issues of public safety or the wider public interest justify it. Care should be taken when reporting methods of suicide and, wherever possible, public information on where to gain help must accompany such reports.
19. Extortion threats should not be published, unless issues of public safety or the wider public interest justify it.
20. The Age will not publish details of the manufacture or use of firearms or other weapons, or of illegal drugs, unless issues of public safety or the wider public interest justify them.
21. Special care should be taken when dealing with children (under the age of 16). The Editor must be informed when children have been photographed or interviewed without parental consent.
22. The Age does not condone chequebook journalism. It will disclose any instance when it has paid for information. Payment for information should be avoided, unless an appropriate senior editor believes there is a strong public interest and there is no alternative to payment. In cases where payment is deemed by the Editor to be in the public interest, the fact of payment should be published.
23. The Age does not condone staff breaking laws in the course of performing their duties. Nor is the paper liable for any such action.
Personal Behavior
1. The Age should ensure that staff have equal opportunity to develop their skills.
2. The company is obliged to provide a healthy and safe working environment. Staff are to have due regard to the health and safety of work colleagues, and observe occupational health and safety laws.
3. The Age values its reputation for independence and integrity. Staff are reminded that some activities outside work hours could have an impact on the standing of The Age.
4. Alcohol should not be consumed while at the work station. Staff members should not be under the influence of illegal drugs or alcohol while at work.
5. No one should be harassed or discriminated against on the grounds of gender, sexual preference, race, color, nationality, religious belief, impairment, age, height, weight, marital status, pregnancy or being childless or having children. The Age supports and adheres to state and Commonwealth equal opportunity and anti-discrimination legislation.
6. Staff should immediately inform the Editor if, as an employee of The Age, they intend to:
give evidence to any court.
chair public forums or seminars arranged by professional conference organisers.
take part in interviews or debates for other media organisations.
undertake any outside employment likely to conflict with their professional duties at The Age.
7. Managers with access to personal information relating to other members of staff are required to treat such information as confidential, and not disclose it to anyone except in the course of discharging formal responsibilities.
As a journalist, as well as using my own moral compass, I am comforted by the idea that may media companies (News Ltd, Fairfax and The Age) have now developed and established their very own codes of ethics to assist journalists in their work. We all know that media scrutinise power and you'd be naive to think they do not exercise it, however should they truly be held accountable for their work? Of course they should! And even better, Media Watch's website provides a list of all existing Australian Media Codes of Practice, open to anyone to view. The link is here FYI: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/resources.htm.
The Sydney Morning Herald in particular has also upheld its professional conduct since the very beginning...
Our editorial management shall be conducted upon principles of candour, honesty and honour. We have no wish to mislead; no interest to gratify by unsparing abuse or indiscriminate approbation. The Sydney Morning Herald, April 18, 1831, April 18, 1831
The code reflects both the Fairfax group's corporate values statement and incorporates the code of ethics of the Australian Journalists Association and has been the root of journalism for 170 years. To see the code in full, click on the following link: http://www.smh.com.au/ethicscode/index.html.
In contrast, I find The Age's code of conduct easy to comprehend, understand and relate to. The way the editor has structured the clauses allow for it to be easily read by journalists, students or any member of the public. I think it's important to break up the issues of professional and personal practice as although they are similar, there are also many differences. Here are a few examples of the clauses in which I find particularly interesting and relevant.
Professional Practice
1. Staff should seek to act always in the best interests of the public and the maintenance of good faith with the community we serve, rather than for the benefit of sectional interests.
2. The public interest includes investigating and exposing crime, serious misdemeanour and seriously anti-social conduct, and investigating and exposing hypocrisy, falsehoods or double standards of behavior by public figures or institutions. It also includes protecting public health and safety.
3. Staff should seek to present only fair, balanced and accurate material.
4. Direct quotations should not be changed to alter their context or meaning.
5. Where a significant inaccuracy or distortion has been published, The Age should publish a correction or clarification promptly.
6. Photographs should be a true representation of events. Photographs should be used in context, captions should be fair and accurate, and digitally enhanced images and illustrations must be clearly labelled.
7. Where they relate to The Age, judgments by the Australian Press Council and other such bodies, and the outcome of defamation actions, should be reported promptly.
8. Editorial material should distinguish for the reader between that which is comment, that which is verified fact and that which is speculation.
9. All commentary and analysis should meet the same standards of factual accuracy as news reports.
10. Sources promised confidentiality must be protected at all costs. However, where possible, the sources of information should be identified as specifically as possible.
11. Only fair and honest means should be used to obtain material. Misrepresentation and the use of concealed equipment or surveillance devices should be avoided. The use of deceptive methods or subterfuge may be condoned only where the Editor is convinced that the potential story is of vital public interest and there is no other way of obtaining the story.
In such cases, the journalist has the right to decline an assignment. If the journalist accepts the assignment, the nature of deceptive methods and the reasons for their use must be published with the story. Journalists deployed in this manner will be indemnified by The Age.
12. People's privacy should be respected and intrusions on privacy should be published only if there is a public interest.
13. Caution should be exercised about reporting and publishing identifying details, such as street names and numbers, that may enable others to intrude on the privacy or safety of people who have become the subject of media coverage.
14. People should be treated with sensitivity during periods of grief and trauma and wherever possible, be approached through an intermediary.
15. Care should be taken when producing and publishing material on the anniversary of traumatic events or crimes not to cause undue distress to the victims or their families.
16. Photographs of victims or grieving people should not be published unless due consideration has been given to issues of sensitivity and privacy. Any restrictions placed on the use of photographs supplied by family or friends should be honored.
17. Gratuitous references to the state of a victim's body or body parts should not be published.
18. The Age will not publish individual cases of suicide, unless issues of public safety or the wider public interest justify it. Care should be taken when reporting methods of suicide and, wherever possible, public information on where to gain help must accompany such reports.
19. Extortion threats should not be published, unless issues of public safety or the wider public interest justify it.
20. The Age will not publish details of the manufacture or use of firearms or other weapons, or of illegal drugs, unless issues of public safety or the wider public interest justify them.
21. Special care should be taken when dealing with children (under the age of 16). The Editor must be informed when children have been photographed or interviewed without parental consent.
22. The Age does not condone chequebook journalism. It will disclose any instance when it has paid for information. Payment for information should be avoided, unless an appropriate senior editor believes there is a strong public interest and there is no alternative to payment. In cases where payment is deemed by the Editor to be in the public interest, the fact of payment should be published.
23. The Age does not condone staff breaking laws in the course of performing their duties. Nor is the paper liable for any such action.
Personal Behavior
1. The Age should ensure that staff have equal opportunity to develop their skills.
2. The company is obliged to provide a healthy and safe working environment. Staff are to have due regard to the health and safety of work colleagues, and observe occupational health and safety laws.
3. The Age values its reputation for independence and integrity. Staff are reminded that some activities outside work hours could have an impact on the standing of The Age.
4. Alcohol should not be consumed while at the work station. Staff members should not be under the influence of illegal drugs or alcohol while at work.
5. No one should be harassed or discriminated against on the grounds of gender, sexual preference, race, color, nationality, religious belief, impairment, age, height, weight, marital status, pregnancy or being childless or having children. The Age supports and adheres to state and Commonwealth equal opportunity and anti-discrimination legislation.
6. Staff should immediately inform the Editor if, as an employee of The Age, they intend to:
give evidence to any court.
chair public forums or seminars arranged by professional conference organisers.
take part in interviews or debates for other media organisations.
undertake any outside employment likely to conflict with their professional duties at The Age.
7. Managers with access to personal information relating to other members of staff are required to treat such information as confidential, and not disclose it to anyone except in the course of discharging formal responsibilities.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Reputation v's Free Speech
After an interesting presentation in class today, yet again I feel compelled to answer the question that seems to remain unanswered....Should Australians follow American Defamation laws or keep to our own. Do we embrace and value an individual's reputation over free speech, or is it the other way around???
I was surprised at the lack of opinion regarding this issue, particularly due to the fact we are all budding journalists about to step foot into the media industry and face such moral minefields..
I know for sure I am content with the Australian Defamation laws and believe following America's ideals would only cause havoc and chaos. Society only needs to consider the growing trend of social networking sites to weigh up the implications American laws could have over here if applied. Can you imagine the offensive and defamatory content Facebook, Twitter and Youtube would present if the right to free speech was written into our Constitution! I think we need to draw the line somewhere, and Australian laws seem to do just this appropriately. Lets even consider journalists here....Where would they draw the line??? Would a line even exist??? Probably not. I can only imagine what our news would turn into if free speech were allowed. A disaster!
So let's all stick to our own devices and laws and be proud of our Australian morals and values.
I was surprised at the lack of opinion regarding this issue, particularly due to the fact we are all budding journalists about to step foot into the media industry and face such moral minefields..
I know for sure I am content with the Australian Defamation laws and believe following America's ideals would only cause havoc and chaos. Society only needs to consider the growing trend of social networking sites to weigh up the implications American laws could have over here if applied. Can you imagine the offensive and defamatory content Facebook, Twitter and Youtube would present if the right to free speech was written into our Constitution! I think we need to draw the line somewhere, and Australian laws seem to do just this appropriately. Lets even consider journalists here....Where would they draw the line??? Would a line even exist??? Probably not. I can only imagine what our news would turn into if free speech were allowed. A disaster!
So let's all stick to our own devices and laws and be proud of our Australian morals and values.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Uniformed or simply misinformed???
Famous Author Mark Twain (“Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”) once wrote "If you don't read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed." But to what extent is this true? Since absolute truth has been rejected, how are we to know who's truth is valid? Are we really just victims of PR piracy or post modern casualties???
This week’s reading “Truth or Dare” by Tapsell and Varley (2001) states “Truth is central to the process and practice of journalism...But what is truth? And how important is it?” Even more importantly, they raise the idea of a “journalist’s truth” that is, A truth, and consider the effect this has on reporting practices. Modern society embraces relative truth...However as budding journos, does this mean we ought to present 'the' truth, or 'a' truth that our chief of staff decides upon? Oh the pressures of being a journalist!!!!!
I thought it would be quite interesting to research into the history of objective journalism. Freelance Journalist Naomi Rockler-Gladen, “most people don't realize that objective journalism is really just a style of writing. Before the 20th century, unbiased news was not the norm in most newspapers. Newspapers would have a specific bias that everyone was aware of, and news stories openly reflected the paper's bias. The language used in newspaper articles was much more descriptive and emotional than it was today.” Objective journalism became more popular in the late 19th century, and has become the accepted procedure or norm of journalism today. That explains it! This is why objective news stories are written using the inverted pyramid. No wonder we've had this idea drilled into our minds since first year.
The website “Honest Reporting” lists 7 important principles of media objectivity. They are merely a guide for journalists to follow when writing stories, however also act as a educational resource for readers, listeners and viewers to help interpret a story and gain its truth. The website applies these principles to a case study on the Israeli war which I found quite relevant. A contributing author to the website, Rabbi Simmons says “since the outbreak of violence in the Middle East , much concern has been raised about media bias and the manipulation of media to influence public opinion.” I agree with Sharon Tickle and believe it’s important to consider the pressures on journalists to work between these two extremes, but also reality. If we haven’t yet realised, we soon will...Journalists work within a “reality of time pressures, market forces, law work culture and practices, human frailty and the journalists own experiences”. But in this reality, whose or what truth are we actually trying to maintain???
So how can readers discern the truth between the lines? Listed here are common methods employed by the media -- intentionally or not -- to influence public opinion. By being aware of these methods, he states, the audience can avoid becoming a pawn in the media war. Click on the link below to check these out!
With reference again to this week’s reading, Sharon Tickle states the “skeptical public’s perception of journalistic practise, exemplified by the old chestnut, ‘Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story’ is far from the benchmark Australian journalism has set for itself.
Police embrace new weapon!
It seems that the latest emerging tool for crime solving isn't a gun, handcuffs, fingerprints or DNA...But updates, profiles and pictures on social networking sites. Some people of course may disagree with the use of facebook and Twitter as resources for Police to do their job and solve crimes, however if we can use it to track down school mates or family generations, why not use it for the benefit of everyone? Associated Press (2010) uses the example of Police in Auburn, Maine. They had a Facebook page for three weeks before it provided Police with evidence to solve a vandalism case. "After putting surveillance video images on Facebook showing three teenagers trashing a hotel spa, police got several tips from people who recognized the boys".
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/strange/news-article.aspx?storyid=131846&catid=82
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/strange/news-article.aspx?storyid=131846&catid=82
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Something Someone Saw
Yes I am a facebook user....No my profile page is not actually 'about me'!
I don't understand why people complain of their profile being hacked into or rumours being spread around about something someone saw about them online. The strict rule is: If you don't want the world to know, don't put it on Facebook!!!! Why is this so hard to grasp? Facebook is NOT a private domain and those using it should not assume it is. After discussions in class today on the issue of Privacy (in particular celebrities), I believe that like actors, actresses, sports people etc, you sign up to a social networking site, you sign your life away and say goodbye to your privacy rights. I had to laugh when doing my research, I came across the "10 privacy settings every Facebook user should know". Although these 'rules' are (ironically) set down by the 'Unofficial Facebook Resource', I believe they do believe they serve a great purpose and I want to share them with you (just for laughs).
1. Use your friends list
2. Remove yourself from Facebook search results
3. Remove yourself from Google
4. Avoid the infamous photo tag
5. Protect your albums
6. Prevent stories from showing up in your friend's news feeds
7. Protect against published application stories
8. Make your contact information private
9. Avoid embarrassing wall posts
10. Keep your friendships private
http://www.allfacebook.com/facebook-privacy-2009-02
I don't understand why people complain of their profile being hacked into or rumours being spread around about something someone saw about them online. The strict rule is: If you don't want the world to know, don't put it on Facebook!!!! Why is this so hard to grasp? Facebook is NOT a private domain and those using it should not assume it is. After discussions in class today on the issue of Privacy (in particular celebrities), I believe that like actors, actresses, sports people etc, you sign up to a social networking site, you sign your life away and say goodbye to your privacy rights. I had to laugh when doing my research, I came across the "10 privacy settings every Facebook user should know". Although these 'rules' are (ironically) set down by the 'Unofficial Facebook Resource', I believe they do believe they serve a great purpose and I want to share them with you (just for laughs).
1. Use your friends list
2. Remove yourself from Facebook search results
3. Remove yourself from Google
4. Avoid the infamous photo tag
5. Protect your albums
6. Prevent stories from showing up in your friend's news feeds
7. Protect against published application stories
8. Make your contact information private
9. Avoid embarrassing wall posts
10. Keep your friendships private
http://www.allfacebook.com/facebook-privacy-2009-02
Fingerprints v Facebook
It seems that the latest emerging tool for crime solving isn't a gun, handcuffs, fingerprints or DNA...But updates, profiles and pictures on social networking sites. Some people of course may disagree with the use of facebook and Twitter as resources for Police to do their job and solve crimes, however if we can use it to track down school mates or family generations, why not use it for the benefit of everyone? Associated Press (2010) uses the example of Police in Auburn, Maine. They had a Facebook page for three weeks before it provided Police with evidence to solve a vandalism case. "After putting surveillance video images on Facebook showing three teenagers trashing a hotel spa, police got several tips from people who recognized the boys".
I agree with Oullett (2010) when she states “for criminals, posting your every move could be a fast track to jail time”. She has published an interesting article on the issue and below are a few examples as to how social networking sites have been used to solve a crime.
• Police in Suffolk, Va., were able to identify suspects involved in a Dec. 14 street fight when cellphone videos were posted on YouTube.
• Police in Chattanooga, Tenn., discovered an online forum where residents were planning illegal drag races, staked out the area and ticketed participants.
• Police in Los Angeles used YouTube and Flickr to identify people suspected of being involved in riots following the June 2009 NBA Championship.
• In November, police in Minneapolis and St. Paul, arrested four people for assault after seeing videos they had posted of themselves.
• A Minneapolis man accused in a shooting was recently arrested after telling a friend about the crime in a Facebook message.
• In December, Massachusetts authorities caught a child-rape suspect after learning about his whereabouts on Facebook.
(USA Today “Cops Using YouTube to Find Criminals”)
Personally, I am all for private investigators and police using any tool available to solve crime for the benefit of society. I assume the people opposing the idea would be those who do not use or are not familiar with these social networking sites and thus do not understand the ‘public’ nature of them. I am sure authorities are not simply using these sites with the intention of breaching privacy laws, but instead are upholding their duties in society to enforce the law and ensure justice is served appropriately. This brings me to this week’s journalism class discussion on ‘Privacy’…
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/strange/news-article.aspx?storyid=131846&catid=82
http://suffolkmedialaw.com/2010/02/15/police-across-the-country-tap-into-facebook-youtube-to-solve-crimes/
I agree with Oullett (2010) when she states “for criminals, posting your every move could be a fast track to jail time”. She has published an interesting article on the issue and below are a few examples as to how social networking sites have been used to solve a crime.
• Police in Suffolk, Va., were able to identify suspects involved in a Dec. 14 street fight when cellphone videos were posted on YouTube.
• Police in Chattanooga, Tenn., discovered an online forum where residents were planning illegal drag races, staked out the area and ticketed participants.
• Police in Los Angeles used YouTube and Flickr to identify people suspected of being involved in riots following the June 2009 NBA Championship.
• In November, police in Minneapolis and St. Paul, arrested four people for assault after seeing videos they had posted of themselves.
• A Minneapolis man accused in a shooting was recently arrested after telling a friend about the crime in a Facebook message.
• In December, Massachusetts authorities caught a child-rape suspect after learning about his whereabouts on Facebook.
(USA Today “Cops Using YouTube to Find Criminals”)
Personally, I am all for private investigators and police using any tool available to solve crime for the benefit of society. I assume the people opposing the idea would be those who do not use or are not familiar with these social networking sites and thus do not understand the ‘public’ nature of them. I am sure authorities are not simply using these sites with the intention of breaching privacy laws, but instead are upholding their duties in society to enforce the law and ensure justice is served appropriately. This brings me to this week’s journalism class discussion on ‘Privacy’…
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/strange/news-article.aspx?storyid=131846&catid=82
http://suffolkmedialaw.com/2010/02/15/police-across-the-country-tap-into-facebook-youtube-to-solve-crimes/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)