|
Dear all,
Don't forget that although media academics have been warning of the excessive powers of the Murdoch empire for decades, it was a humble investigative journalist - Nick Davies of the Guardian - who actually unearthed - at considerable personal risk and after years of dogged pursuit - the real concrete evidence of wrongdoing at the NOTW. It shouldn't be a 'them and us' - there are plenty of professional, enlightened journalists who want to see their industry cleaned up and who are dismayed by the links between Cameron et al, the police and Murdoch's press. They too are frustrated at the lack of mainstream debate on the issue. Wider collaboration, perhaps....?
Best wishes
Sarah Lonsdale
Lecturer in Journalism at the University of Kent (and, for my sins, a practising journalist)
________________________________________
From: Media, Communications and Cultural Studies Association (MeCCSA) [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Campbell, Vincent P. (Dr.) [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 09 July 2011 10:57
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Statement on Inquiry into press
Hi All,
A quick comment and a question on these issues:
It surely is very irritating that media figures, e.g. at The Guardian, are talking like this is some massive revelation (the Independent today asks if it's Britain's Watergate...) when to us it's old news. At least since the formation of the CPBF both it and media academics generally have been talking about the excessive power and influence of Murdoch. By the time I started studying the field, in the early 1990s, Murdoch's power was already part of the canon- part of British Media 101. Why did no-one listen to us? That's a question for the field really.
Anyway, a proper research-oriented question for colleagues: What strikes me as completely missing from all the frantic reporting about gutter journalists, corrupt cops, and Cameron's decision-making is any kind of discussion of the mobile phone companies who were clearly allowed to bring products/services to the market in the early 2000s that were not secure. Mobile phones were (I believe they have tightened this now) clearly very easy indeed to hack into and I wonder if anyone has looked into/is looking into this kind of thing- i.e. the regulation of information and communication technologies in terms of privacy measures incorporated into new products/services. It seems to me that the mobile phone companies are ultimately at fault for dead kids' and soldiers' phones being hacked- why is no-one having a go at them or talking about proper regulation of telecoms? If anyone knows of research in this area I'd be greatful for some suggestions.
Best wishes,
Vincent Campbell
Department of Media & Communication
University of Leicester
________________________________________
From: Media, Communications and Cultural Studies Association (MeCCSA) [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Venkata Vemuri [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 08 July 2011 23:03
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Statement on Inquiry into press
Hi,
I would not normally use this space to draw public attention to my views. However, the issue of the NoW scandal has been in the public sphere for some time now and I feel every individual has the need to be heard. Also, being part of this mailing list, I believe the issue genuinely concerns all of us.
1. When journalists themselves stop believing that the press has to be free to be an effective communicator, then nothing can save the press. It is beyond salvage, as it is.
2. Would the CPBF have had some moral authority had it campaigned for alternate media regulation before the political establishment did so? This is an innocent question. Treat it as such without attributing motives.
2a. I saw the Prime Minister's press conference where he talked about the probe into media regulation. The media luminaries were only bothered about getting some kind of an embarrassing admission from Cameron on his relations with Coulson. They nodded their heads sagely when Cameron talked about the regulation issue. And went away, meekly. At least I will give more weight to their calculated silence during the press conference than their expected defence of their freedom in the coming days.
3. The editors of today are no different from CEOs of companies -- they get the same, big pay packets, the freebies, private lunches and audiences with the industry and political bosses -- and they would do anything to protect their perks. For them, freedom of the press has come to mean the freedom to do the bidding of the proprietors. No wonder they are meek. They like being meek.
4. The humble journalists are no different. They are aspirational, as well, to be kicked upstairs. It is they who weakened the journalists' unions to the point of toothlesssness. When was the last time that a journalist raised a professional issue before a union? Or when was the last time that a union took a professional issue to the public sphere?
5. So, whose freedom are we talking about? Whose regulation? We are making such a big hullabuloo about sensational news. If on the one hand it is true that proprietorial pressure leads to journalists discounting professional ethics to concoct or package news, it is also equally true that there is a large audience receptive to such news. Journalists are as much part of the same society as their audiences. Give them what they want, the editors have often told their reporters and sub-editors. The proprietors frown when the editors stop saying so. But what the journalists -- the editors in particular -- do not realise is the proprietors won't frown even if the editors stop saying so, as long as the money keeps coming in. Let us not deceive ourselves into believing that we can disallow the proprietors to use the paper or the channel to serve their own agenda or interests. But let us also be professional and courageous enough to let the proprietors know that money can be earned the proper way also. But then, how many of us have that spine?
6. Only the naive can believe that a body -- such as the one proposed to oversee the press -- can be truly independent. Are we? Is anyone? And, pray, who are these people who will run the body? Are they from outer space without links and totally independent? Who will pay them? Who will fire them? In my opinion, had Ofcom been truly independent, the BBC would not have escaped with polite raps for unprofessional coverages as has been the case in some recent cases related to documentaries.
7. Ideals are not such a bad thing, even in a post-capitalist society. It will not be embarrassing if journalists began to believe in the ideals of their profession. They are not committing a wrong. The people -- whom we consider vaguely as a body of audience -- are not fools. The public outcry over the NoW scandal was NOT influenced by the press. The people boldly came to their own conclusions following the revelations. And the rest of the press, the advertisers, followed the public opinion. Could they have dared to go against it? No. The people will always be there behind us journalists so long as we act as journalists, so long as we are courageous enough to expose our own bosses when they try to subvert our profession for their personal interest. Our relationships, our ideologies, our freedom within the newsroom dictate the shape of news. Best to sort out our internal problems first. The content will automatically get taken care of. And there is no room for any independent body to sort out internal problems. Otherwise, let us go and sell fish and chips.
8. It takes more than guts to make this happen. It takes a large dose of self-belief, as an individual journalist and a collective of journalists. Capitalism may make us sell a product, but it cannot make us sell ourselves. If this sounds moralistic, let me iterate that morals are not all that bad. Let us dust the Harold Evans from the attic and try read it afresh. Not just for ourselves. But for the hundreds of students who take up journalism courses in this country every term. This is not the place to talk about how the academia sees the profession. Suffice to say that there is a gap between theory and practice and both theorists and practitioners do not mind the gap to keep their interests alive.
9. Freedom and regulation are really big issues. Should not we first bother ourselves with the fate of the NoW journalists who will be losing their jobs? Assuming they were innocent? Assuming they were only doing their job? Assuming they could do nothing else but follow orders?
Venkata
PS:
1. The issue of right to reply needs to be looked into afresh, elaboration of which is not the purpose here.
2. These were my immediate thoughts upon perusing the mail. If there are to be comments, let them be limited to the merits of the case and not personal positions and dispositions. I am not really a know-all, you know! Tks.
Venkata Vemuri
Research Student
Media School, Bournemouth University
UK
[log in to unmask]
http://vvemuri.blogspot.com
________________________________________
From: Media, Communications and Cultural Studies Association (MeCCSA) [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Thomas O'Malley [tpo] [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2011 4:27 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Statement on Inquiry into press
Now is the time to ditch the Press Complaints Commission: CPBF backs inquiry into the ethics and culture of the press
The CPBF today welcomed the announcement by the Prime-Minister of an inquiry into the ethics and culture of the press in the light of the failure of self-regulation to prevent the scandal of phone-hacking.
The Press Complaints Commission has demonstrated that voluntary regulation of the press has not worked. Now is the time for a serious consideration of an alternative system which can defend press freedom and uphold and enforce high standards.
The PCC has failed because it is funded by the newspaper industry, controlled by the proprietors and lacks any mechanisms for properly enforcing high standards across the press. The current situation repeats the scandals of the 1980s and early 1990s which brought down the PCC’s predecessor, the Press Council. The PCC was set up to solely to prevent the government acting to enforce proper procedures in this area. History must not repeat itself. This time there must be effective reform.
The Campaign will be pressing the inquiry to back strong measures to reform the present system and take power over regulation out of the hands of proprietors and into an independent body, properly constituted and with effective powers.
The PCC should be wound up and replaced with an effective self-regulatory body which earns the respect of newspaper and magazine readers, the general public and journalists alike. It should have clear powers to order meaningful recompense to complainants, including fines for blatant breaches of the editors’ Code of Practice.
The new body would also ensure that the right of reply, a measure for which the CPBF has campaigned since its inception, is established in the case of complaints concerning factual inaccuracy.
For further information contact Barry White CPBF Office 07774 607419.
--------------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA mailing list
--------------------------------------------------------
To manage your subscription or unsubscribe from the MECCSA list, please visit:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=MECCSA&A=1
-------------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA is the subject association for the field of media, communication and cultural studies in UK Higher Education. Membership is open to all who teach and research these subjects in HE institutions, via either institutional or individual membership. The field includes film and TV production, journalism, radio, photography, creative writing, publishing, interactive media and the web; and it includes higher education for media practice as well as for media studies.
This mailing list is a free service from MeCCSA and is not restricted to members.
For further information, please visit: http://www.meccsa.org.uk/
--------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA mailing list
--------------------------------------------------------
To manage your subscription or unsubscribe from the MECCSA list, please visit:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=MECCSA&A=1
-------------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA is the subject association for the field of media, communication and cultural studies in UK Higher Education. Membership is open to all who teach and research these subjects in HE institutions, via either institutional or individual membership. The field includes film and TV production, journalism, radio, photography, creative writing, publishing, interactive media and the web; and it includes higher education for media practice as well as for media studies.
This mailing list is a free service from MeCCSA and is not restricted to members.
For further information, please visit: http://www.meccsa.org.uk/
--------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA mailing list
--------------------------------------------------------
To manage your subscription or unsubscribe from the MECCSA list, please visit:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=MECCSA&A=1
-------------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA is the subject association for the field of media, communication and cultural studies in UK Higher Education. Membership is open to all who teach and research these subjects in HE institutions, via either institutional or individual membership. The field includes film and TV production, journalism, radio, photography, creative writing, publishing, interactive media and the web; and it includes higher education for media practice as well as for media studies.
This mailing list is a free service from MeCCSA and is not restricted to members.
For further information, please visit: http://www.meccsa.org.uk/
--------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA mailing list
--------------------------------------------------------
To manage your subscription or unsubscribe from the MECCSA list, please visit:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=MECCSA&A=1
-------------------------------------------------------
MeCCSA is the subject association for the field of media, communication and cultural studies in UK Higher Education. Membership is open to all who teach and research these subjects in HE institutions, via either institutional or individual membership. The field includes film and TV production, journalism, radio, photography, creative writing, publishing, interactive media and the web; and it includes higher education for media practice as well as for media studies.
This mailing list is a free service from MeCCSA and is not restricted to members.
For further information, please visit: http://www.meccsa.org.uk/
--------------------------------------------------------
|
