|
Pertinent observations by Dr. Wahl-Jorgensen, particularly about the threat to Britain's multicultural public sphere because of Murdoch's growing pestilence. But what the country faces is a bigger threat in the form of the political class using this opportunity to shackle the freedom of the press. Any government-subscribed independent body overseeing the activities of the press will put paid to the media's independence. we, whether journalists or academics, have a fight on hand: to thwart the government's intentions while restraining the Murdochs of this world. We will need a larger movement to ensure this.
At the same time, Dr. Fenton's observations need to be seen in perspective. True that the media today is in the grip of corporate culture. To be fair to the media, why blame the media alone? The society in this country is in the grip of corporate culture. Look at the banks where the bosses cock a snook at the government and dish out millions in bonuses while genuine families are refused mortages. Look at the high street. Look at the closing down of 'non-profitable' companies, offices, etc. The corporate culture has invaded the family structure as well. We live in a country where there is no bother that save potatoes and onions most of the stuff is imported from outside as long as the money comes in. That a set of credit cards can become the basis of a family's ruin tells a lot about the kind of society we live in. What freedom does a citizen of this country have, that we are talking of muzzling the press' freedom? Hasn't the corporate culture invaded our universities, as seen in increasing redundancies of academic posts, plans to scrap 'non-profitable' courses, hiking student fees beyond all practical limits?
Let me turn the top and ask another question: Who are these millions of people who buy papers in this country to read salacious news, gossip and scandas? Who are these millions who are watching pathetic programs on television, boosting advertising and reach? And why are these millions silent when the politicians are maiming the NHS, playing with the lives of students, sending hundreds of innocent youth to distant wars at huge costs? These are not the traits of a healthy democracy which we are afraid the press is going to weaken.
We also need to remember one fact. It is only a disgruntled person who has an axe to grind who becomes the source of a major investigative scoop. Technically, accepting information from that source is unethical, just as unethical it is to tap phones. All news is subjective and majority of sourcing questionable. That is a fact. Good the PCC is being blamed. But why replace it? Blame those in the PCC who did not follow the objectives of the PCC.
By the way, there has been such a hue and cry over the LoTW phone hacking, but let me ask one question: Has any one of us sought to know what kind of stories the tabloid got from the hacking? How did such stories adversely impact on the hapless victims of hacking? No.We dont even know these simple facts. Why? Because we have already made up our minds. We, who don't quibble paying an illegal traffic fine or outrageous power bills or criminal credit card or insurance bills, are making a hue and cry over hacking. Why be selective in our criticism?
We have seen what a media organisation which has not succumbed to corporate culture, which follows ethics, which is socially responsible, etc, etc, has achieved. The reference is to the BBC. When was the last time the BBC dished out a scoop or an exclusive? It has set itself on a moral pedestal and yet many of its programs are pathetic, wilfully subjective and as shown in some recent cases, patently false. But we not bothered that the top executives and presnters and anchors and correspondents get corporate salaries and perks. Is that okay for a 'publicservice' broadcaster?
During election time, we all know for sure which newspaper supports which political party. And we take great pride in supporting our respective ideologies. Is that ethical? Being objective? There is no influence of the so-called corporate culture in this and yet we do not think that such open alliances sweep aside 'ethical journalistic practice'. Is this practice helping 'deliberative democracy'?
While on corporate culture, who do we think encouraged it in the first place? We, the journalists who, eager to accept the bigger pay packets and freebies that the Murdochs of this world threw at us, killed unionism. When that can happen, what else can we kill, for a price? Objectivity, fairness, ethics? Yes to all. Then wny blame the Murdochs? Every selfish act produces a Murdoch. Controlling Murdoch or the press is not going to control our selfishness. Instead of recognising this malaise in us, what do we do? We call for regulating the press.
We are culpable for the state of the press. We alone can remedy it. Not outsiders. Yes, outsiders.
Venkata
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 Karin Wahl-Jorgensen [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2011 10:18 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: News of the World debate
Hi all,
If anyone is interested, Natalie Fenton and I have both written commentaries for Red Pepper on the News of the World debacle.
Mine is here:
http://www.redpepper.org.uk/the-fight-isn%E2%80%99t-over/
And Natalie Fenton's here:
http://www.redpepper.org.uk/notw-more/
Best,
Karin Wahl-Jorgensen
Dr. Karin Wahl-Jorgensen
Reader
Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies
Cardiff University
Bute Building
King Edward VII Avenue
Cardiff, CF10 3NB
(029) 2087 9414
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/contactsandpeople/profiles/wahl-jorgensen-karin.html
http://cf.academia.edu/KarinWahlJorgensen
-----"Media, Communications and Cultural Studies Association (MeCCSA)" <[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]> wrote: -----
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
From: "Messenger, Davies Maire"
Sent by: "Media, Communications and Cultural Studies Association (MeCCSA)"
Date: 07/09/2011 05:39PM
Subject: Phone hacking debate
Dear colleagues
It's been obvious to me (as i'm sure to many of you) as I've watched and read about this unfolding story almost obsessively, that if ever an issue arose around which the Policy Network could have some useful discussions/events/whatever, then this is it. However, I haven't emailed the list about it so far, as every day (almost every hour on some days) is bringing fresh revelations, so we don't yet know what the full story is - clearly there's much much more to come.
I agree that an event for the Policy Network would be useful - and we've promised the exec that we would have one. Like Julian I'm on holiday at the moment, as are many others I'm sure, and I know everyone is very busy, so not much can be done straight away.
However a number of possible topics have arisen in this exchange: one that occurs to me is the relation between academic media research and the work of the 'hackademics' (great name) - people who are either former or still practising journalists and who are rightly defending the work they do - and how this relationship can be used productively to further the issues we're variously interested in.
On this point - it's surprising that not much has been said about the role of the NUJ in upholding professional standards and defending those who've suffered from the activities of NI . It's been pointed out by some commentators that Murdoch's destruction of the unions at Wapping is a contributory factor to the present situation. The NUJ website is worth a look.
Perhaps we should move this discussion to the Policy List - so I've copied this mesage to that List. It's worth remembering that the Network lists include numbers of people who may not be on the Main List, and vice versa.
Maire MD
Chair, Meccsa Policy Network
Máire Messenger Davies, PhD, FRSA
Emerita Professor, Media Studies
Centre for Media Research, School of Media, Film and Journalism
University of Ulster
Cromore Rd,
Coleraine BT52 1SA
Northern Ireland, UK
Telephone: +44(0)2870124069.
www.arts.ulster.ac.uk/media/cmr.html<http://www.arts.ulster.ac.uk/media/cmr.html>
LATEST BOOK - 'Children, Media & Culture' http://www.openup.co.uk/children_media
________________________________
From: Media, Communications and Cultural Studies Association (MeCCSA) on behalf of Sylvia Harvey
Sent: Sat 09/07/2011 4:15 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Statement on Inquiry into press
I agree with Julian that a MeCSSA Media Policy conference would be useful. Perhaps in the Spring of 2012 with a possible title : 'Making Media Policy, Using Specialist Research'. Then if the consultants would like to join the academics that is possible. I'd be glad to help organise this. But it might be best to take any future lengthy policy comments off the main MeCCSA list and place them on the existing MeCCSA Policy list. Best wishes, Sylvia
Sylvia Harvey,
Visiting Professor, Institute of Communications Studies, University of Leeds,
Visiting Senior Fellow, London School of Economics
On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Julian Petley <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Dear all,
I realise that the NoW debacle may not be of interest to all MeCCSA members (in which case perhaps the debate might move to the MeCCSA policy network site), but Vincent's comment does raise a really important wider issue, namely the immense dificulties facing those media academics interested in influencing media policy. Such people have, for the most part, not been simply ignored but have had to sit by and watch whilst policies have been enacted which are the exact opposite of what they have recommended, or would have recommended could they have been bothered to intervene. Take, for example, broadcasting policy, where all the academic running has been made by economists, and 'free-market' ones at that, such as Professors Peacock and Cave. What the government wants, in this as in all other areas, is policy-driven research, and in the new academic future which awaits us, the pressures to deliver this will only increase - witness the AHRC's lamentable engagement with the 'big society' nonsense. Furthermore, this isn't a problem facing only media academics but civil society groups as well - I speak from experience as the chair of the Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom (which, since its birth, pace Venkata, has campaigned tirelessly for media democratisation and accountability). Time after time distinguished academics who are members of this list have given freely of their time to respond to government consultations on the CPBF's behalf, and have repeatedly found their recommendations turned on their heads in the subsequent legislation. There are also MeCCSA members who fought long and hard to overturn the 'extreme pornography' clauses in the Criminal Justice Bill and found themselves treated with utter contempt by the government in the course of a 'consultation' which was no such thing - rather, it invited support and indeed acclamation for a decision which had clearly already been taken. Outside our own area, one could point to the forthcoming cuts in legal aid which have been made in the teeth of highly informed opposition from just about everyone who knows anything about the subject. Then there was the resignation of the government's drugs adviser, who was sick and tired of having his committee's recommendations ignored and indeed inverted by policies designed to appease the Daily Mail. I could go on, but I won't. So, to return to Vincent's question: why won't people listen to us? In my view, this has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the work produced by media academics - most of the academic work on the British media is remarkably well informed, highly critical and perfectly readable. However, the other day at the LSE I had to contain my annoyance (well, a bit) when listening to a senior civil servant at the DCMS who will be one of those responsible for piloting (or rather pushing through) the next Communications Bill, which will undoubtedly deliver yet more 'deregulation', suggesting that civil servants found it difficult to engage with academic work on the media (yes, because it works against the grain of preconeptions which are so deeply embedded in DCMS thinking that they're not even recognised as preconceptions by those in their thrall). So, what I suggest we need is a critique of the whole policy-making process, and one which makes common cause with other academic fields too. As a start I would recommend people who are interested to read Philip Schlesinger's excellent writings on policy-making - unfortunately I'm away at the moment and don't have a reading list in my head, but perhaps Philip might provide one? He has an excellent chapter in Greg Philo's and David Miller's book Market Killing, in which other authors also have a good deal to say about matters relevant to this topic. I hesitate to suggest a conference, since we're all so busy, but I'd be happy to be involved in organising one if others are interested. The title 'What's the Point?' springs to mind, but I fear that carries rather negative and weary connotations, whereas what's needed is a really combative engagement with the policy-making process and the question of academics' involvement (or enforced non-involvement) with it.
All the best, Julian.
Julian Petley.
________________________________________
From: Media, Communications and Cultural Studies Association (MeCCSA) [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Campbell, Vincent P. (Dr.) [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: 09 July 2011 10:57
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Venkata Vemuri [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: 08 July 2011 23:03
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
http://vvemuri.blogspot.com<http://vvemuri.blogspot.com/>
________________________________________
From: Media, Communications and Cultural Studies Association (MeCCSA) [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Thomas O'Malley [tpo] [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2011 4:27 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/
--------------------------------------------------------
--
Sylvia Harvey, FRSA,
Visiting Professor, Institute of Communications Studies, University of Leeds
Visiting Fellow, London School of Economics
Home Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
--------------------------------------------------------
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/
--------------------------------------------------------
|
